Wikipedia talk:Navigation template

I've started a discussion about an arbitrary number of entries here and believe that this should be prohibited just like "Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative". How should the paragraph be written or should one sentence suffice? Logoshimpo (talk) 05:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Novels has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Michelangelo1992 (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Please see this discussion: WT:WikiProject Agriculture#Red links in breed navboxes? --woodensuperman 14:15, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

In relation to the above discussion and several other similar ones, I'm proposing an update to the exception language that currently reads Red links can be retained in navigation templates that represent a well-defined and complete set of data (geographic divisions, annual events, etc.), where deleting red links would leave an incomplete and misleading result. I would like to clarify that this only applies to groupings that are defined objectively, where any reader would obviously notice any omissions even without any subject matter knowledge. Anything where inclusion is debatable and items may be added or removed based on interpretation of the group should not qualify and therefore such boxes should not contain redlinks.

Suggested phrasing: add sentence reading "Such sets must be defined objectively and not subject to debate over item inclusion." Plus list several examples (ideally linked) that do and do not qualify. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2026 (UTC)