2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $10064.65Goal: $10000

Template talk:Category

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Eek.[edit]

I'm not sure "best of" really constitutes bronze and silver articles. In fact, I'm almost certain it does not. Sterile (talk) 17:23, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Magic! (edit) I kept silver because most silver articles are pretty good reads, and we don't have a lot of gold. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 01:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not all categories have "best of" and "important articles"[edit]

...so those should be optional. In particular, this applies to all categories that use Template:Meta-cat.--ZooGuard (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Magic! See it in action at Category:Christian clergy. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 21:54, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

"Important" parameter[edit]

Can we just get rid of it or have it properly formatted? It looks ugly when you input (what's with this pre markup?) and it's pretty pointless as we already categorize important articles through piping an asterisk or a blank space(i.e. we add [[Category:Alternative medicine|*]] that generates an asterisk category. Most of the time, it's blank, takes up space (it's not supposed to show by default but I still see it everywhere), and looks otherwise incomplete. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 17:55, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I agree. Anyone else object? Christopher (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)