Template talk:Infobox militant organization

Requested move

I wonder if this infobox could be renamed? We have a specific guideline (WP:TERRORIST) against using the word 'terrorist' to describe organizations (except as the sourced opinion of others). While the title is not visible to users, using this infobox looks like a POV statement to other editors of the article. See, for example, the low-level edit warring at ETA switching between this and Template:Infobox War Faction, which is not a good fit for the organization. I suggest Template:Infobox militant organization. Any objections? TSP 19:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah sure. I'm alright with that. --snowolfD4 ^{( talk / @ )} 15:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool. (Thanks - I was just going to check that you had noticed this proposal, as the creator). As the template has no other substantive edits, I'll go ahead and move it in the next day or so if we get no more comments. I'm happy to sort out the links from the pages that use it. TSP 17:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Crimes

A user was complaining that the description "Crimes" was POV, and he does kinda have a point since it's not wikipedia's duty to decide what's crime and what's not. Can we also reword that? I don't really have anything in mind though... Something more neutral like "acts" would do it. Regards, Kerem Özcan (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Its ok! I found another variant: attacks. Anyways, we can put also "actions" and also no problem to save the crimes for some special cases. Thanks, Andranikpasha (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I think Wikipedia is not a juristic organ to judge what is a crime and what is not, so I think the "crime section" in general rather than a specific case, and can be replaced with something else. Regards, Kerem Özcan (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but anyways we had some specific events when a crime is obvious. For example a military organization which operates like a gang group with some financial etc criminal purposes (mafia fightings, trafficing), or make of ethnic cleasnings, massacres of a large number of peaceful inhabitants, internationally recognized crimes against humanity. For other cases I prefer to add one more term - "actions", so maybe its better to not replace but add another one term. Andranikpasha (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

See I disagree with that. Because "obvious" is a subjective term. You gave here your definition of "obvious", however to me for example killing somebody (anybody) is "obvious" enough to be considered as a crime. However wikipedia should be an objective place, as opposed to subjective, hence imho we should reword it. Kerem Özcan (talk) 23:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Kerem, Im agree with you in theory, but anyways we cant call for example a killing of 10000 inhabitants of a town or village an "activity" or even an "attack". There're events classified by the international organizations, nations or courts as crimes. An example, the killings of pupils in Beslan school. Or the destroying of Budha monument by Al-Qaeda: I dont know if even the supporters (if they exist) can call these events "an activity" or "a (political) act". We can call these tragedies crimes until no any user is opposing us. Andranikpasha (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

You're still giving subjective examples. That's your idea that nobody will oppose them. "until no any user is oppossing" can not be a defining term. If we go back to our case of ASALA, I can not understand how one can call killing diplomats an act, but you do. (Although this does indeed qualify as a crime against humanity. check the article 7/a, and civilian. This was just an example. If you want to talk specifically about this one we can do it on the talk page.) This problem will always occur unless we find a rocksolid definition for "crime" or simply rename it. Regards, Kerem Özcan (talk) 06:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

"Actions" perhaps? TSP (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Fine by me. Kerem Özcan (talk) 21:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the change. Regards, Kerem Özcan (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

In case someone is watching this page, I have created a related Template:Infobox_Law_Enforcement_Action but having a lot of trouble figuring out how to make it work. I see this one is NOT transcluded and wonder if it is working at all. Thanks CarolMooreDC (talk) 00:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I know I'm fifteen years late to this discussion but shouldn't the parameter be changed too for the same reason? Charles Essie (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Add parameters?

This infobox is currently being used on Haqqani network, but we realized that users are using parameters that don't exist in the template and therefore do not display on the article. Could we add "Opponents" and/or "Allies" to the infobox?--RDavi404 (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Update: We just went with the "war faction" infobox instead.--RDavi404 (talk) 20:36, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Why not having parameter abbreviation?

I think it's necessary.Fire and Ice (talk) 05:24, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Suggested field addition

Would anyone object if a "Rivals" field was added, in the general area of the "Allies" and "Opponents" fields? Quite often you get similar organisations with the same opponents who engage in occasional, or even frequent, feuding with each other. I occasionally have to revert the addition of these organisations to "Opponents" as it's misleading to list them alongside genuine opponents. FDW777 (talk) 11:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Parameter request

Template:Infobox political party has a parameter for slogans and that doesn't appear to be the case here. Why is that? Militant organizations often have slogans too. Charles Essie (talk) 04:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. (you specified an incorrect pagename; this infobox is only semi-protected so you can add the parameter yourself). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

To editors Pppery and Charles Essie: sorry, didn't notice this not done response and went ahead to include a "slogan" parameter and updated the /doc page. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 16:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

No objection. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

"Template:Infobox terrorist organization" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Template:Infobox terrorist organization and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 31 § Template:Infobox terrorist organization until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  00:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

colorcode

Would it be ok to add a colorcode parameter like the one in {{Infobox political party}} to use with the official color of a militant organization, if there is one? MarioGom (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

How can i make one on mobile as im trying to add a militant organization

i dont know how to crate one Jabhatansaralsham (talk) 01:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Flag?

What is the flag param used for? Do I just plop a Template:flagicon in it? When I put the bare file name it doesn't seem to do anything. Maybe we can add modify the documentation to add instructions or an example toobigtokale (talk) 01:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Try adding it with square brackets and an appropriate pixel size. Charles Essie (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Anthem

Some militant organizations have anthems. Should that be included as a parameter? Charles Essie (talk) 17:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Add field for color scheme?

Things like color schemes and logos are important parts of group presentation. Eponymous-Archon (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)