This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
Was this template intended to appear on the page forensic science only, or on all of the other pages listed (e.g. forensic pathology or forensic anthropology)? - Rustavo Talk/ Contribs 22:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm wondering whether this really belongs on the Forensic Psychology or Forensic Psychiatry pages. While essentially all relate to criminal investigation, the subject matters are substantively different and there really isn't any overlap except in profiling and psych autopsies, which are extremely tiny pieces of the much larger fields. I can be convinced otherwise, but right now, I'm not seeing it. Tamara Young 17:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Is Gil Grissom, a fictional character, really one of the four notable "People of Forensics"? I didn't know that being a character in a popular television series nominated you for "notable" status among other historical figures. There already is a link to "The CSI Effect", isn't that enough? 137.238.101.173 ( talk) 20:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
As per the hidden field. I wanted to add an external link to an upcoming ABC TV Catalyst (Science show) dedicated to forensic science - the show is also available for download. It covers DNA testing to solve a 4000 y.o. murder, advances in drug forensics; a collaboration between US and Australian forensics, and a story that will be of enormous interest to Australians on the alleged murder of a national icon. Who will give me permission to add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.176.173 ( talk) 03:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
This template is very wide. I'd like to suggest {{ Vertbox}} conversion. -- Geniac ( talk) 00:09, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't he in the notable persons section? ThuranX ( talk) 05:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Further to my comment dated July 11, 2011, I am requesting feedback about a proposal to remove the 'People' section from the Forensic Science sidebar template.
Rationale:
I was tempted to act on this according to WP:BB. However, as I expect this move to be a bit contentious, I would like some discussion before acting. Any comments? — RB Ostrum. 14:23, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
@ Paine Ellsworth: Since this template was built as a sidebar that appears at the very top instead of as a normal navigation template I'm not sure collapsing it was such a good idea. Considering WP:COLLAPSE is an accessibility issue. In any case, the sections have to be redone as they were never quite right to begin with. Forensic chemistry, for example, can hardly be called a physiological science. Toxicology would but general forensic chemistry falls outside that purview. And the rest of the "uncollapse" parameters have to be put into the rest of the articles. -- Majora ( talk) 21:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Customisable images encouraging the sidebar user to find "different and better image... for a specific article subject" seems unusual for a sidebar, which usually has a single generic image related to the broader subject. Putting a unique image in the sidebar like this has three obvious problems:
Should the "image=" option be removed and replaced with the same default skull image wherever this sidebar appears? -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 15:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Do not rely solely on navboxes for links to articles highly relevant to a particular article, or override the "image" field to illustrate something from the article.) Belbury ( talk) 18:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Is
File:Punuk.Alaska.skulls.jpg the best image to use here? The skulls depicted aren't part of a crime (the caption on Commons says Currents carry many dead things to Punuk Island making it the graveyard of the Bering Sea
). An image of a fingerprint (such as
File:Teerahertz near-field array for μm-scale surface imaging.png) might look better, and could be cropped to be a slim banner.
Belbury (
talk) 19:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)