Template talk:Gotras of Jats

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pakistan This template is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles India This template is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles

This template was considered for deletion on 24 July 2012. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

I think this template is getting too big and should be reorganized in a different manner. Maybe alphabetical [show] links to compress the space and make it easier for viewing? Andrew Colvin • Talk 00:04, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not just too big, but not updated to agree with what appears to be a definitive list of Jat clans. This may be a case for a category. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've rendered it somewhat more manageable with a simple edit into alphabet groups, but this does not remove my doubts over its overall usefulness. If it were updated and applied to all relevant pages that would be of some use, but the very great number of entries render it at best very hard to maintain. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The alpha dividers made it substantially easier to edit. If consensus is to get rid of them fine. The problem with this template is that, where this part of the world is concerned, there seems little familiarity with the English alphabetical order. But, since two editors have now removed them with no discussion whatsoever, I am not going to get bend out of shape over it. If that is what consensus wants then that is what consensus gets. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the dividers were a good idea too - I'd support their reinsertion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the dividers don't help with keeping the template in alphabetical order, and add excessive whitespace depending on the screen width. Frietjes (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you were correct I would agree with you. I support the dividers. I also support the building of consensus, not a draconian removals, especially after a reversion. I detest and deplore what appeared to be the start of a reversion war. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, but what did I do wrong after you reverted me? the hlist format automatically expands the content to fit the width of the template. by adding group labels, the width of the content is reduced. by adding linebreaks in the middle of the list, it adds more whitespace. Frietjes (talk) 17:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually Plastikspork who removed the labels the second time, possibly by edit conflict while making other changes (conflicts don't always show - the software sometimes just loses versions). Also, considering the automatic expansion of the hlist, I now no longer have a preference for the inclusions of the labels - I really don't know, so I'll leave the consensus to others to reach. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SurajMal sir please you can create one important jat clan Parmar.? These are references for Parmar Jat clan^[1][2][3] you can also find more reliable sources please create Parmar clan page and please idhar reply mat Karna Kuch bi Rajputs ko pata lagjega or ye apna comment m 1 2 din mein delete kardunga Dhanevadh.

103.172.167.95 (talk) 15:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]