Template talk:Infobox saint/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Template-protected edit request on 25 August 2018

Could |honorific_prefix= and |honorific_suffix= please be added? Either side of |name= as with Template:Infobox Christian leader. Thank you, Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 14:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Gaia Octavia Agrippa, okay. Frietjes (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Frietjes, Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 19:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Christians only, or not?

Is this template intended only for use with Christian saints? If not, then "Honored in"/"Venerated in" should refer to the religion, not just the denominations, in which the person is venerated. If it is only intended for Christian saints, this should be made explicit. I ask because it was recently added to Durbalnath. PamD 08:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Punctuation

The infobox renders Beatified = "{{{beatified_date}}}, {{{beatified_place}}} by {{{beatified_by}}}", as in "12 December 1929, Rome by Pope Pius XI". I think this is improper punctuation, because "Rome by Pope Pius XI" makes no grammatical sense, as if it is saying that Rome is somewhere near Pope Pius XI or that Rome is something that was produced by Pope Pius XI. There should properly be a comma between the name of the place and the name of the pope, which are in apposition. —BarrelProof (talk) 06:03, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

Removed closed template merger template. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:14, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 5 February 2020

Please remove the |abovestyle= and |headerstyle= parameters (both currently modifying the infobox background color to gold), per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Style, color and formatting: "A good guideline is not to add extraneous style formatting over that in a default infobox without good reason.".

Seeing the bright yellow in an article infobox is rather jarring, and I don't think this would be controversial, but if you think it might be, or anyone objects after the fact, I'd be perfectly happy to discuss first instead. Thanks, –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. The gold color is a bit loud, but it has been the consensus for at least 12 years. It should at least be discussed. Plenty of infoboxes use custom header colors.

The text in the guideline is somewhat ambiguous. When I see General consistency should be aimed for across articles using the same infobox. A good guideline is not to add extraneous style formatting over that in a default infobox without good reason., I read "if a specific infobox is colored gold by default, don't put extra colors in it." – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Infobox color

Following up on the previous edit request, I'd like to remove color styling from this infobox so that it uses the default. To reiterate, I find the yellow color itself rather jarring (at the very least, a softer shade should be used). But probably more importantly, I don't think specific subclasses of person infoboxes (or most any for that matter) should really deviate from the default unless there's some really really good reason (as opposed to Jonesey, I do read the guideline as applying to all person infoboxes, regardless of subtype). WP:PLA and WP:UNDUE apply here – when I see 20 biography articles with the same, default infobox color, and then suddenly come upon #21 with something different, my attention is immediately drawn to it unduly to wonder why.

Would anyone object to switching to the default infobox style? –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)