Template talk:Michael Jackson

Michael Jackson Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Michael Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Michael Jackson 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.Michael JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Michael JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Michael JacksonMichael Jackson articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I just included in the "Related articles" section a link to the episode "Stark Raving Dad" of The Simpsons, where Michael Jackson guest-starred. I think it's important to include that episode in Michael Jackson's template, since even less important things like Thriller (viral video) are included.

This template is huge and needs to be cut down substantially. As it is, when present on Michael Jackson, this simply duplicates a lot of the information already in the article. Also see my comments on Talk:Michael Jackson. android79 04:37, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Again, it's for use as a navigational device, not to actually present any information. --FuriousFreddy 10:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand their purpose, but my concern is their size, especially when stacked one atop the other in Michael Jackson. I'll throw out some ideas for streamlining them here sooner or later. android79 20:55, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Michael Jackson is the only page where that should be a problem, since he's both "Michael Jackson" and a member of "The Jackson 5". I wouldn't want to stretch them horizontally (they're both 500px across, to compensate for folks still using 800x600 displays). Perhaps streamlining the information (removing all compilation albums or low-charting singles) would be a good idea? --FuriousFreddy 21:45, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Android, The whole point of templates is for summary purposes. You pointed out about it duplicating a lot of information when it is on the michael jackson page. That point makes no sense whatsoever!. Even on the michael jackson main page, the links are not ordered in an easy to find fashion. The template, therefore gives the reader a clear ordering of possible interests related to the article. Think about why the concept of templates were devised in the first place.

On the point of the template being huge, no it's not huge. It's not huge by any standard. Not huge by wikipedia's standard. We have all seen far bigger templates, I don't believe I need to give anyone examples of truly 'huge' templates. Please don't go there!--161.74.11.24 11:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I've realized that it is huge; gargantuan, even. I've cut it down. --FuriousFreddy 00:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quote the sentence, which state that images are only allowed in article-space, else put it back. --161.74.11.24 12:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's right there, on the page linked from my edit summary: The material should only be used in the article namespace. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. Pretty straightforward. android79 12:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Any one could have put that on the page. As far as I can see, there's no logic in saying that one can use an image on an article, but yet not use the same image on a template. The template is subsection or part of the article. Therefore, saying that an image can be used on an article, but not a template which the article uses in incoherent and illogical. Either, the information placed on the help page is incorrect or there's misintepretation on your part. I want some sort of confirmation that that hasn't happened! --161.74.11.24 11:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not a subsection or part of the article; that's the point of that guideline. The template is Template:Michael Jackson. The article is Michael Jackson. One could just as easily apply the template to Fruitcake, which would be in violation of fair use. See Wikipedia_talk:Fair use#Album covers: Strike two lines from policy?. Despite being extensively debated, that language remains. Copyrighted images used solely for decorative purposes are not fair use. android79 13:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson controversies is a major part of michael jackson. I think it should be included. Skinnyweed 22:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say split the number one singles into their own template with all of the singles. Superior1 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh fuck it I did it myself.

Superior1 22:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the Jackson 5 tours was just added to the list of concert tours. I don't see any particular reason for this one to be special. Either all the J5 tours should be listed, or none. I think none, since this template seems to focus on his solo career and his life, but don't feel strongly enough either way to revert the edit. GDallimore (Talk) 10:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to delete it but now I understand the addition because the Victory Tour was basically the "Thriller" tour. There was no real "Thriller" tour so he performed a solo set of the Thriller songs on that tour. MrBlondNYC (talk) 00:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the template to the version where the main articles come first, [1] otherwise they are hard to find. I can't understand why Death of Michael Jackson would have been relegated to the "influence on society" section. [2] SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 07:18, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the related articles section: The link to "Moon Walk" should be changed from Moon Walk (autobiography) to Moonwalk (book). The autobiography link redirects to the book link. Patchy1Talk To Me! 05:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shoud the michael jackson template be placed on the stark raving dad page? (i have no idea on how to place a template on a page) --TUSWCB (talk) 11:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

does anyone know why people keep deleting the Death and 1993 allegations ages from the template? MaJic (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. The same is happening over at Invincible album. he simply died - there is no reason to use words like "demise".

PS: the allegations are still missing right now...

Both guitarists should be included in the MJ template, for they have a decent portion in his music legacy, along with Quincy Jones. Any wikipedian who doesn't agree with this, simply doesn't have much sense of understanding.(LonerXL (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Agreed, but by that logic, ALL members from MJ tours should be added...and I'm pretty sure the majority of them don't even have articles. MaJic Talk 2 Me. I'll Listen. 22:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also see your point of view, but Jennifer and Orianthi are the most recognizable members. Whenever Michael performed on tours, his guitarist was ALWAY his "music tour assistant" and right hand woman. The guitarist was always the second star in Michael's shows. We are only cheating ourselves and potential wikipedians who are interested on these two, for if it wasn't for Michael, we never would have known they existed. (LonerXL (talk) 00:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

There was an album released in September "The Definitive Collection", from Universal/Motown which needs to be added before This Is It under compilations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.48 (talk) 19:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this game not included? He was a playable character. Sarujo (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Sarujo ..i miss understood your edit summary i see that you add the info to the other article...the (lie) thing was that i tough you were saying you fix an old edit for an IP in this temple ..but then just added back rumble thing!!..Again sorry about!!..now about the addition...not sure you will ever get people to agree to it..but i will not revert it any more..mind you ..the article Rumble does not even have one references in it , let alone about MJ..anywas all the best and again sorry for my edit summery!! ..Buzzzsherman (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The rows in the template are spaced out too far apart. Perhaps the row height of every row should be decrease. Otherwise, the template would seem too bulky. Ring me up at my talk page if you want a reply. Regards, ANGCHENRUI ^Talk♨ 14:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Template:The Jackson 5 and this should be merged. Michael and the Jackson 5 are both well known. The Jacksons and Jackson 5 templates should be added as a showable box on this. I'll see if I can work out how to do it and I'll post it here.--79.68.89.251 (talk) 14:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as no-one's replied after a week of posting this, I'm going to implement the changes anyway and if anyone doesn't like it they can drop a line here. And yes, my IP has changed.--85.210.18.79 (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i did not see this early..We generally refrain from punting boxes in boxes for easy of use to our readers. NOTE how small the text is in the second box.Moxy (talk) 20:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. if you do want to nest them, should should at least use "border=child", as I have done above. Even so, this is just not readable. 174.56.57.138 (talk) 04:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is only place for 20 groups in the template. And the main ones are already in place. We don't create separate groups for all things. Especially for something that only has two articles. Awardmaniac (talk) 11:36, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everybody, I attempted to fit more than 20 groups in the template by grouping 4 of them with a nested {{navbox}} here:

{{Michael Jackson/sandbox}}   (deleted – see subsection below; CiaPan (talk))

Please verify, fix the style for the inner navbox and apply to the template.
Pinging deisenbe. --CiaPan (talk) 15:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I hoped for and I'm making it live. Thanks. I wish I could figure out how to make subgroups. deisenbe (talk) 12:28, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To Whom It May Concern[edit]

I have applied the changes desired by User:deisenbe (and presented in the sandbox subpage linked above) here: Special:Diff/887860392. --CiaPan (talk) 09:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted references to a sandbox, because the sandbox has been deleted. --CiaPan (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]