This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sustainability template. |
|
Environment: Sustainability Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
This template was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This is now a very large and complex template. I would have thought something smaller and more focused would have been better. Johnfos ( talk) 08:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I really dislike this template, and many similar ones proliferating now on Wikipedia. It adds little and clutters up articles. V.B. ( talk) 01:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
How come this template is collapsed in some articles and uncollapsed in others without any parameter controlling the state of the template? I want to make it collapsed in sustainable food system. -- Phenylalanine ( talk) 11:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
{{Sustainability |state=collapsed}}
should do the trick for you.
Sardanaphalus (
talk) 19:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)I combined several of the like-seeming groups to make collapsible sections for the template.
Bit of rationale/explanation on the groupings
Perhaps the I PAT group should also be collapsible, if there is a way to specify a default group to start out uncollapsed but let the template user select something else. Then template users could select whatever section is appropriate to have uncollapsed.
There are a few technical problems to be worked out. The spacing didn't come out quite as expected for the section heads for the collapsed sections.
Thought this might help address the issues with the large size of the template. Zodon ( talk) 07:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
The template, in its current incarnation, seems to have been subject to expansion creep, and has become rather untidy with an over wide scope. It seems to me that within Category:Environment both sustainability and conservation are the major subtopics. There is a template covering the environment in general, called {{ environmental science}}. But there is no template covering conservation. I wonder whether it is worth considering the scope of the sustainability template in this context, perhaps developing the related conservation template also in the process? -- Epipelagic ( talk) 23:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
It seems that splitting the section on "Sustainable activities and professions" into "sustainable activities" and "management" introduces an arbitrary distinction based simply on the name of the article/discipline. Is there really a systematic difference between sustainable tourism, or sustainable landscape architecture and sustainable forest management? If you used another name for the later article (e.g. Sustainable forestry), would it still be classified in the "managment" section. I think the two groups should be merged back into one, or the reason for separating needs to be clear based on the concepts involved. Zodon ( talk) 08:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I think we should simplify the template by removing the specific renewable energy sources (Biofuels, Wind, Solar) and just have the general renewable energy article (with possibly the commercialization sub-article).
There has been some edit activity relating to adding an article on sustainable governance to the template. I think it is reasonable to add an article about sustainable governance. The article that has been proposed is Environmental governance, which is the most appropriate article on the topic that I am aware of. Are there others articles that are more apropos?
I think the article should go in the section on Sustainability disciplines and activities, under either Sustainable activities, Management, or Environmental.
Governing (i.e. managing people or countries) is a major area of human activity. Governmental policies, etc. can have tremendous impact on environment and sustainability. Governments are also tremendous users of resources. Therefore it seems reasonable to have an article about sustainable governance on the template. Zodon ( talk) 07:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
I've removed Planetary boundaries from the template. I'll restore it if I see a credible reason why it should be included, but I ask that you wait until about 24 hours from now to restore it, as I don't have a good way to check for a certain environmental anon's tendency to add links to that article from everywhere. Last year it was 350.org (among others), this year it's planetary boundaries. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Add Planetary boundaries to "Sustainability disciplines and activities"'s "Management" subsection. 99.190.81.244 ( talk) 06:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Continuing the discussions above, this template seems large and wieldy in its present form. Collapsible sections would help, I think, if someone can do that. It sounds like that has been done before, but reverted? Anyone still around who can summarize earlier discussions/ interventions to improve this template? Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 09:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest removing the group, "Environmental disciplines", from this template. That area is covered more comprehensively by two other, related navigation boxes, Template:Environmental science and Template:Environmental social science. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 09:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Use the sustainable economics be added to template, as per Sustainability#Economic dimension Jonpatterns ( talk) 12:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
For your information, I just created
Template:Environmentalism. Do no hesitate to improve it!
Tamita Secilliterelle (
talk) 19:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC).
I am thinking of adding the individual 17 Sustainable Development Goals also to this navbox where/if they fit. So e.g. SDG 1. What do you think? Is it OK to perhaps add an extra category on "sustainable development"? EMsmile ( talk) 15:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sustainability template. |
|
Environment: Sustainability Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
This template was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This is now a very large and complex template. I would have thought something smaller and more focused would have been better. Johnfos ( talk) 08:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I really dislike this template, and many similar ones proliferating now on Wikipedia. It adds little and clutters up articles. V.B. ( talk) 01:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
How come this template is collapsed in some articles and uncollapsed in others without any parameter controlling the state of the template? I want to make it collapsed in sustainable food system. -- Phenylalanine ( talk) 11:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
{{Sustainability |state=collapsed}}
should do the trick for you.
Sardanaphalus (
talk) 19:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)I combined several of the like-seeming groups to make collapsible sections for the template.
Bit of rationale/explanation on the groupings
Perhaps the I PAT group should also be collapsible, if there is a way to specify a default group to start out uncollapsed but let the template user select something else. Then template users could select whatever section is appropriate to have uncollapsed.
There are a few technical problems to be worked out. The spacing didn't come out quite as expected for the section heads for the collapsed sections.
Thought this might help address the issues with the large size of the template. Zodon ( talk) 07:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
The template, in its current incarnation, seems to have been subject to expansion creep, and has become rather untidy with an over wide scope. It seems to me that within Category:Environment both sustainability and conservation are the major subtopics. There is a template covering the environment in general, called {{ environmental science}}. But there is no template covering conservation. I wonder whether it is worth considering the scope of the sustainability template in this context, perhaps developing the related conservation template also in the process? -- Epipelagic ( talk) 23:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
It seems that splitting the section on "Sustainable activities and professions" into "sustainable activities" and "management" introduces an arbitrary distinction based simply on the name of the article/discipline. Is there really a systematic difference between sustainable tourism, or sustainable landscape architecture and sustainable forest management? If you used another name for the later article (e.g. Sustainable forestry), would it still be classified in the "managment" section. I think the two groups should be merged back into one, or the reason for separating needs to be clear based on the concepts involved. Zodon ( talk) 08:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I think we should simplify the template by removing the specific renewable energy sources (Biofuels, Wind, Solar) and just have the general renewable energy article (with possibly the commercialization sub-article).
There has been some edit activity relating to adding an article on sustainable governance to the template. I think it is reasonable to add an article about sustainable governance. The article that has been proposed is Environmental governance, which is the most appropriate article on the topic that I am aware of. Are there others articles that are more apropos?
I think the article should go in the section on Sustainability disciplines and activities, under either Sustainable activities, Management, or Environmental.
Governing (i.e. managing people or countries) is a major area of human activity. Governmental policies, etc. can have tremendous impact on environment and sustainability. Governments are also tremendous users of resources. Therefore it seems reasonable to have an article about sustainable governance on the template. Zodon ( talk) 07:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
I've removed Planetary boundaries from the template. I'll restore it if I see a credible reason why it should be included, but I ask that you wait until about 24 hours from now to restore it, as I don't have a good way to check for a certain environmental anon's tendency to add links to that article from everywhere. Last year it was 350.org (among others), this year it's planetary boundaries. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Add Planetary boundaries to "Sustainability disciplines and activities"'s "Management" subsection. 99.190.81.244 ( talk) 06:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Continuing the discussions above, this template seems large and wieldy in its present form. Collapsible sections would help, I think, if someone can do that. It sounds like that has been done before, but reverted? Anyone still around who can summarize earlier discussions/ interventions to improve this template? Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 09:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest removing the group, "Environmental disciplines", from this template. That area is covered more comprehensively by two other, related navigation boxes, Template:Environmental science and Template:Environmental social science. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 09:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Use the sustainable economics be added to template, as per Sustainability#Economic dimension Jonpatterns ( talk) 12:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
For your information, I just created
Template:Environmentalism. Do no hesitate to improve it!
Tamita Secilliterelle (
talk) 19:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC).
I am thinking of adding the individual 17 Sustainable Development Goals also to this navbox where/if they fit. So e.g. SDG 1. What do you think? Is it OK to perhaps add an extra category on "sustainable development"? EMsmile ( talk) 15:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)