Template talk:Fishing industry topics

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing 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.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Lack of edit buttons[edit]

Why is this navbox missing the usual "V•T•E" links in the top left? I can't see anything unusual in the code. Belbury (talk) 16:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the edit function and removed the links to category pages as per WP:NAV. Moxy-

00:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get you to this talk pls... @Epipelagic:. Moxy-

01:28, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes? — Epipelagic (talk) 01:43, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the links? Moxy-

11:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which links you are referring to? If you mean the missing edit links on the nav box, as mentioned in the initial post above, then I see you have restored them, and that's fine. I didn't restore them myself because I had no idea why they weren't displaying (it's not obvious). If you mean the three links to rather large categories which extend well beyond the ambitions and coverage of the nav box, then yes, of course I have looked at them. It seems entirely appropriate to provide those links and remiss to not provide them. If that is what you mean, then I have no idea why you would dig in, and start harassing me and wasting time on this rather trivial issue, though that seems to be the way things are going on Wikipedia. Or are you referring to something else? — Epipelagic (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yup pretty trivial thing.... not wasting my time with someone playing dumb . Moxy-

00:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly think you are operating from some privileged place with your royal "we" summons above, and your cryptic refusals to spell out what your issue or issues are. You are right, someone is "playing dumb" here. — Epipelagic (talk) 01:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As the user who Epipelagic accused of making a false edit summary when I initially replaced these nine category links with articles where suitable articles existed, I started a thread at Wikipedia_talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#Category links in navboxes, which sounds like a more productive forum for this question.

Category links in a navbox seems off to me (the reason I made the edit was that I'd clicked a link in the navbox while browsing, expecting to read more about algae as a fisheries product, and got dumped at a category page) but I'm not clear on what the MOS position is. --Belbury (talk) 08:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Belury, you claim you replaced "the pot luck direct category links with articles where they exist". You did not, and I merely pointed that out. Mind you, it was better you didn't, since it would have bloated the template with really minor articles. Things move on and Wikipedia culture changes. Little point now for the very few remaining serious content builders to hang round – time they packed up. It's going to be a different game anyway, with AI. Please feel free to mess around as you want – I won't interfere. — Epipelagic (talk) 09:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More insults, great. I'll see if the MOS talk page gets any constructive feedback. Belbury (talk) 09:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Belbury. Saying you can mess around was a displaced reaction to Moxy's overbearing behaviour. Anyway, I'm no longer engaged with Wikipedia. Moxy's not the real reason – just a reminder of why it's time to retire. — Epipelagic (talk) 23:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]