I am trying to build a series of articles listing and describing Scottish Westminster constituencies for different periods from 1708 to the present, but I am finding this template difficult to relate to. I have already moved List of UK Parliamentary constituencies in Scotland to Scottish Westminster constituencies from 2005, which now includes links and protolinks for other articles in the series. I was thinking of moving the template to Template:Scottish Westminster constituencies from 2005, but because it lists constituencies by party it will not fit that location indefinitely. An election will change the pattern and the template will not cover the entirety of the "current period" (which will end when results of the 6th Periodical Review are implemented). Besides, I am otherwise not happy with that way of listing constituencies, not least because for anyone looking for a link for a particular constituency it presumes prior knowledge of political condition. Laurel Bush 14:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-17T14:32:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-09-17T14:32:00.000Z-Move_template?","replies":[]}}-->
Life might be simpler in the long run if I work Template: Scottish Westminster constituencies into this one, putting content of this one effectively into a section called Current constituencies. Laurel Bush 11:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-20T11:42:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-09-20T11:42:00.000Z-Work_in_Template:_Scottish_Westminster_constituencies?","replies":[]}}-->
No. makes more sense to work this one into Template: Scottish Westminster constituencies. Laurel Bush 11:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-20T11:46:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-09-20T11:46:00.000Z-Work_in_Template:_Scottish_Westminster_constituencies?","replies":[]}}-->
I really don't like this template, at least in the way it is currently used. What is the point of having a list of current constituencies attached to an article such as Lanark Burghs, which was abolished in 1832?
It seems to me that it would be much better to have a separate template for each of the periods in between boundary revisions, to make them collapsible (using the {{Navbox}} template).
Until then, I suggest that this template should be removed from all except the current constituencies. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-27T20:33:00.000Z","author":"BrownHairedGirl","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-BrownHairedGirl-2007-09-27T20:33:00.000Z-Separate_templates","replies":["c-Laurel_Bush-2007-09-28T10:40:00.000Z-BrownHairedGirl-2007-09-27T20:33:00.000Z"]}}-->
Sounds complicated, and like something I have been thinking of attempting. Can not as yet quite see it really working. Laurel Bush 16:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-08T16:01:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-08T16:01:00.000Z-Separate_templates","replies":[]}}-->
Sorry. Maybe I am not really seeing your intention. I seem to be seeing a series of links to 'articles' which list constituencies, not lists for use in constituency articles. Laurel Bush 13:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-19T13:59:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-19T13:59:00.000Z-Draft_of_separate_constituency_boxes","replies":["c-BrownHairedGirl-2007-10-19T16:19:00.000Z-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-19T13:59:00.000Z"]}}-->
Cheers. That is making more sense. Looking pretty good now. A lot of work needed to get the system into all constituency articles. Laurel Bush 17:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-19T17:01:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-19T17:01:00.000Z-Draft_of_separate_constituency_boxes","replies":["c-BrownHairedGirl-2007-10-19T17:15:00.000Z-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-19T17:01:00.000Z"]}}-->
What happened to the template that seperated the seats into parties, that was much better? AJUKTalk!! 15:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-08T15:11:00.000Z","author":"Ajuk","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ajuk-2007-10-08T15:11:00.000Z-Old_template","replies":[]}}-->
See under Move template? above. Laurel Bush 16:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-08T16:02:00.000Z","author":"Laurel Bush","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Laurel_Bush-2007-10-08T16:02:00.000Z-Old_template","replies":[]}}-->
Lokasi Pengunjung: 3.128.200.132