Template talk:Sappho sidebar

Why duplicate existing navbox?

This sidebar duplicates the existing {{Sappho}} almost exactly – of the seventeen articles linked from it, sixteen already appear in that template. It's also being placed on the exact same articles. What's the motivation for making an entirely separate navigation box which does virtually the same thing? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, the motive was to collect all relevant stand-alone articles in a template (so far, same thing as the navbox) that is placed in a prominent position within the article, where it's more easily visible and accessible. While I noticed the navbox earlier, I was under the impression that a navbox and a sidebar could exist simultaneously, so I just went with it, because I supposed that it would be helpful. I knew that there exists a Socrates sidebar and a Socrates navbox, although arguably Socrates is a more prominent historical figure and perhaps this might not be a good comparison. Piccco (talk) 23:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Although I believe that it can be helpful, If you think it is useless, we could open a vote for deletion. Alternatively, it could be simplified by removing some perhaps redundant parameters, like the image, and keep it as a simple sidebar with the poems. Generally, I'd be interested to hear what more experienced editors think. Piccco (talk) 00:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Given that clearly this duplication is a thing that is done elsewhere, I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Navigation template#Navbox/sidebar duplication about the general principle. My feeling is that we should as a general rule avoid having both unless there's a good reason but the current guidance does explicitly say both may be appropriate and then doesn't elaborate on that. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I just read it. Piccco (talk) 12:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)