This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofpolitics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofDiscrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This template is of interest toWikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of allLGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit theproject page or contribute to thediscussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofJewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofGermany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
At the moment, we now have more articles linked for non-German mimic groups, which were of minor significance. Does this not give them undue weight? Certainly the post-WWII American neo-Nazi groups have their own category. Should the 1930s-40s less significant mimic groups have their own template too?TheLevelOn (talk)08:46, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted attempts to give this template non-standard background colors, which do not serve any encyclopedia purpose, and might be regarded as a provocation by other editors. I have also done the same with{{Communism}} template, for the same reasons. Templates are nsvigational tools, not celebrations of their subjects. --The Anome (talk)09:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've revertedHildeoc's good-faith change of the NSDAP flag to a swastika, in line with the consensus at{{Nazism sidebar}}. Nazism was literally the ideology of the NSDAP state: that's where the name comes from. Moreover, the NSDAP flag looks less obtrusive than the swastika, and is used elsewhere as an icon to represent other Nazi-related things. Comments invited. --The Anome (talk)18:51, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's reasonable to follow the arguments listed atTemplate talk:Nazism sidebar#RfC: Swastika size in infobox (2, take 2), but looking at it now, I think this is a different situation. Thesplash of red seems significantly more distracting in a navbox than it would be in a sidebar. The informational value of this image, in this context, is very low, and this seems like decoration to me. I would prefer removing the symbol completely.Grayfell (talk)20:05, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do not feel strongly about inclusion, but with that said, I do not believe the "situation" presented is "different" than that of the Nazism sidebar. It is for visual identification. I agree with The Anome that something should be present per his reasoning above. But, the sidebar consensus was to include a small swastika at the time back in 2015. Of course, consensus can change.Kierzek (talk)00:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely no image is necessary at all. Any image placed here is a glorfication of Nazism, because the images is given a clear column which is a large amount of space to exist in. I've removed it, so we can start with a clean slate for this discussion.Beyond My Ken (talk)04:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
