Template talk:Baltimore (virus classification)

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Ernsts in topic Indexing for Search Engines

Name "Baltimore classification" no longer appropriate

edit

This template seems to have been expanded beyond just the Baltimore classification (which as I understand it was just the I, II, III, IV, V, etc.) It now includes groupings above and below that level. A new title for the template is probably in order. Thoughts? Suggestions? Zodon (talk) 02:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Collapsing - by DNA/RNA/etc. or by Baltimore class?

edit

The template was fairly large, so I added collapsing.

  • First I tried it with making the groups DNA, RNA and retroviruses collapsible. e.g. [1]
  • Then tried collapsing by Baltimore class (I, II, etc.) [2]

They work out about the same screen size. Any thoughts about preferred version? Zodon (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Out of date

edit

This template may be well out of date by now. Editing here to remember to update it later. Bervin61 (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2015 (UTC) Seems to be out of date again: Pithovirus not mentioned as member of NCLDV (of course fam. Pithoviridae is a proposal only). Paramyxoviridae are now of order ...--Ernsts (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Indexing for Search Engines

edit

Is it possible to make this template not to be indexed by Web search engines?

If I use a Web Search Engine (e. g. Startpage) 'every looking for any item mentioned in the template, then any article is presented as a hit that has the template included. Because of this there is a lot of useless hits that avoids finding any hits with real information. I zhink there should be a way as articles in one's user area are not indexed.

Kind regards! --Ernsts (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply