This template is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
For how to use this banner template, see its documentation.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
I like the previous version (yellow/red/white) better. It is representative of the route marker colors and of the show itself. While the shades of gray "looks professional", it seems rather dull and blah, and doesn't do justice to TAR. Tinlinkin08:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree. I also like the way the old scheme organized the international versions of the show, making it possible to add future seasons without much trouble. Plus it was easier to access those miscellaneous pages like the Trivia page. Can I vote to revert it Sorry when I posted this my browser had something weird with it. Now it looks good HansTAR
Why are the official sites necessary in this template? I know Template:ARseasons ([1]) had them, but why now? Navigational templates for Wikipedia should only link to Wikipedia content, nothing else. Tinlinkin08:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added them because I've seen them in other show navboxes (like the ones for Desperate Housewives, The OC, and Ugly Betty) and think that they're useful to have. I wrote a few weeks ago on the Amazing Race talk page that I was thinking of adding them, and no one ever responded, so I thought it would be okay. Is there a policy about navboxes that states that external links shouldn't be included? If there isn't, I think it should be acceptable to include them. CrazyLegsKC13:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikipedia:Navigational templates, the first sentence gives me the impression that nav templates are intended for navigation within Wikipedia and nowhere else: "A navigational template is often a small list for use in several related articles, without the usual disadvantages of duplication; in particular, editing is done in a central place, the template page."—the list being composed of links within Wikipedia. There is nothing in that page that says external links are not allowed, however. So here is my second reason why I'm uncomfortable with the many external links: most of those links are unrelated for some articles. If I view the TAR 3 article, it would be reasonable to want the link for the TAR 3 official site; it is probably not reasonable to show the official website link for TAR 9 in that article. A similar situation applies if you choose to link to official countries: if you're viewing the TAR Brazil article, why would you need to have an external link for TAR Asia? The example templates you presented probably have a stronger case for EL inclusion as the one EL cited points to a common parent website, and the subarticles can claim that website as their source (although I think "External links" sections are better than ELs in a navbox--the subarticles' sources would be clearer to point out). So I have to disagree here. Tinlinkin00:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shanghai Rush
I think Shanghai Rush should not be included, because if we consider the related shows there should be Expedition Impossible, Peking Express, and some other shows that are like TAR. But they have nothing to do with the real TAR. That's my opinion. Gonzalochileno (talk) 22:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This I wholeheartedly agree with, this is a template for The Amazing Race. NOT Shanghai Rush which is not related to the Amazing Race at all. --Kartoffel0705:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It sort of is. And you should really pay attention to time stamps. Gonzalochileno raised this issue nearly a year ago.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know this was a year ago, I was just wondering why it is in the template when it can be linked to the China Rush article itself. This is a navigation box for The Amazing Race after all. --Kartoffel0707:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because discussion of the Shanghai Rush is still somewhat relevant to discussion of the China Rush and the series as a whole.—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because they are TV show titles rather than random nation names. It's The Amazing Race Asia, Australia, etc. And I've never seen anyone ever complain that italicization makes it harder to read. Just deal with the fact that as they are television titles that they must be italicized.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neither one "works" better than the other, which does bring it back to its appearance. ApprenticeFan and myself both feel the earlier version was better looking. Gloss • talk13:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Latin America 6
Hello there! I saw on the Spanish wiki that there's Latin America 6, can you guys confirm that? *sorry for writing here, I'm just confirming, 'cause it's still not listed in the template and still doesn't have English version, thank you* tatasport my talk 15:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that the original U.S. version seasons section has the italicized number 34 next to the number 33. The none of the numbers in the seasons section should be italic, and I already removed the italics, but Sportsfan 1234 reverted my edits as they are disruptive. I continued to remove the italics and wrote the notes in the edit summary box, but they kept being reverted by Sportsfan 1234 every time I try to do so. Why don't you protect this template and leave it to the registered users? Only they can fix the italics.
99.209.40.250 (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]