i can't figure out why this template i've made is broken. could someone fix the coding? Kikodawgzzz (talk) 01:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-09-28T01:21:00.000Z","author":"Kikodawgzzz","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Kikodawgzzz-2010-09-28T01:21:00.000Z-Broken_template","replies":["c-Zodon-2010-09-28T04:29:00.000Z-Kikodawgzzz-2010-09-28T01:21:00.000Z"]}}-->
At the moment this template just covers areas already covered by other templates. {{Gender and sexual identities}}, {{LGBT}}, {{Sexual orientation}}, and {{Close relationships}}. The idea of this template was proposed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality#Sexuality sidebar/template/side-navbar?. It would be prudent to promptly reshape it along the lines proposed there (or whatever else interested editors deem appropriate) to make it into a distinct template, lest it be deleted as a duplicate. Zodon (talk) 05:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-09-29T05:31:00.000Z","author":"Zodon","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Zodon-2010-09-29T05:31:00.000Z-Template_needs_development","replies":["c-Kikodawgzzz-2010-10-08T18:06:00.000Z-Zodon-2010-09-29T05:31:00.000Z"]}}-->
[Outdent] Perhaps a navigation template is not a good way to provide the function you are looking for. "Navigation templates are particularly useful for a small, well-defined group of articles" Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates. You indicate that the collection of articles may not be small. You also indicate that it overlaps a lot with aritcles already in navigation templates (templates of long-standing, well developed, reasonable to large size, etc.) There also appears to be ambiguity (fuzzyness/cross-over) in the inclusion criteria. See also Wikipedia:Navigation templates. For all these reasons, the purpose is probably better served by use of categories Category:Sexology and/or lists Index of sexology articles. Zodon (talk) 06:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-10-12T06:51:00.000Z","author":"Zodon","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Zodon-2010-10-12T06:51:00.000Z-Template_needs_development","replies":[]}}-->
Any objection to the addition of Affair to this template? 94.197.82.73 (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2013-06-24T15:08:00.000Z","author":"94.197.82.73","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-94.197.82.73-2013-06-24T15:08:00.000Z-Affair","replies":[]}}-->
Since Ve4ernik has yet to address the additions he made to the template here on the talk page, I am doing so now. I reverted Ve4ernik here and here. When I stated, "Revert, per what the template states.", Ve4ernik replied, "The edits do respect the template description and are relevant." I then stated, "Wrong; read the template. You added a bunch of stuff that is better covered at Template:Sex or is already covered there. Discuss on the talk page." I also noted, "And gender topics (transgender or otherwise) do not belong on this template; we have Template:Gender and sexual identities and Template:Transgender sidebar for that."
The template states, "This template is about the essentials of modern human sexuality as currently scientifically and societally understood, including sexological topics. It is not a template related to various sexual acts and their offshoots; for that, see {{Sex}}. Before considering adding an item to this template, try to find a more specific navigation template, if one exists. When adding or removing an item from the template, be sure to make the appropriate change to the target page as well."
Notice the words "essentials of modern human sexuality as currently scientifically and societally understood." In what way does the vast majority of what Ve4ernik added classify as "essentials of modern human sexuality as currently scientifically and societally understood"? Pedophilia? Not essential to human sexuality in the least; that is a paraphilia that is covered at Template:Paraphilia. Sexcam? That article does not yet exist, nor do I think it should exist. Templates are not for WP:Redlinks. And with regard to being transgender, gender identity is not the same thing as sexuality.
On a side note: There is no need to WP:Ping me to this section since this template/talk page is on my WP:Watchlist. Flyer22 (talk) 04:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2015-06-06T04:10:00.000Z","author":"Flyer22","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Flyer22-2015-06-06T04:10:00.000Z-Latest_additions_to_the_template","replies":[]}}-->
And when it comes to topics about human reproduction, we have Template:Human reproductive physiology. I'm not stating that none of what Ve4ernik added to Template:Human sexuality can validly be on the template; I'm stating that we outline scopes for templates and have other templates for a valid reason -- so that these templates do not become overcrowded with any and everything related or slightly related to the topics. This is why templates advise to look for more specific and/or better templates that the listings might fit on. Flyer22 (talk) 04:29, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2015-06-06T04:29:00.000Z","author":"Flyer22","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Flyer22-2015-06-06T04:29:00.000Z-Latest_additions_to_the_template","replies":["c-Ve4ernik-2015-06-11T21:12:00.000Z-Flyer22-2015-06-06T04:29:00.000Z"]}}-->
Template:Human sexuality → Template:Sex – The template should be merged with the Template:Sex, as both templates are indifferently centered on the same topic of Human sexuality. See Wikipedia:Proposed mergers#New requests. Sharif uddin (talk) 21:19, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-07-14T21:19:00.000Z","author":"Sharif uddin","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sharif_uddin-2016-07-14T21:19:00.000Z-Merge","replies":[]}}-->
Lokasi Pengunjung: 3.145.34.13