Template talk:Sabaton

Metal Template‑class

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Incomplete template[edit]

I was a bit surprised to see that this template had been reduced to the extent it has, to include only the subset of albums that have articles. I understand the reason for this heavy trimming was that it's not immediately helpful in terms of navigation to have red links in the navbox. Looking at WP:EXISTING:

Red links and redirects should normally be avoided unless they are very likely to be developed into articles. Red links can be retained in navigation templates that represent a well-defined and complete set of data (geographic divisions, annual events, filmographies, etc.), where deleting red links would leave an incomplete and misleading result. Even then, editors are encouraged to write the article first.

Removing red links is on some level justified here, but I would strongly argue that removing the links to studio albums without articles leaves precisely the form of incomplete and misleading result the guidelines discourage. The guideline explicitly mentions filmographies as an exception, which should be analogous to discographies to a very high degree. The same applies to various degrees to the other subsections, though arguably for example the "EPs" line could be omitted, since it has no articles.

Of course, the ideal scenario is that articles for each album and other entries are created. Until then, the band template should at least not be misleading.

There remains the question whether to list albums without articles as red links or unlinked text. I thought the unlinked text model used in this template earlier was relatively elegant, all things considered, but going on WP:EXISTING I guess red links are preferable.

Unless there is major disagreement, I will edit the template to reintroduce the missing studio albums and possibly other relevant content. Laanders (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved, at least in the case of the studio albums, by establishing independent notability for the removed/redirected album articles.Laanders (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the template should only contain links to actual articles, not unlinked / red-linked entries. That's per WP:NAV: "Navigation templates provide navigation within Wikipedia". There's is the catch-all Sabaton discography article included in the template, and that's sufficient, IMO. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and agree with the general justification for not having red links or unlinked text in navboxes. However I believe the exceptions stated in WP:EXISTING, for cases where such omissions would create incomplete and misleading results are also important to observe, and that at least an artist's set of studio albums must be considered one such exception. Laanders (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sabaton discography lists 8 studio albums, and the template lists 8, so I think this solves the issue (?). K.e.coffman (talk) 04:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's resolved. When I made the original post above, the template was missing the albums from before 2008, but I was able to establish independent notability for each of the missing albums, so they could be re-added with proper, blue links which is of course absolutely preferable. Apologies if that was not clear; the discussion after that was mostly academic. Laanders (talk) 09:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]