Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Infobox settlement. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
short descriptions
So I and Fram in Template:Infobox_settlement/sandbox have made the template automatically add short descriptions, and proposing the addition. This can be seen in Template:Infobox settlement/testcases; one can see the short descriptions by putting .shortdescription { display:block !important; } in one's common.css. The only problem seems that sometimes the country is given in the type field, e.g as in here, where there is "in greece" which creates some awfulness for the description, and similar. So I'm wondering if there should be a filter that checks if that field is valid or if there is a country in it... Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:45, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- Galobtter, you might want to explain how to locally override the short description. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- You'd have to put {{Short description}} with the description below the infobox Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- It would be better if the infobox had a "no short description" parameter so (if needed) the normal short description template at the top of the article would work. Johnuniq (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- Actually, that is essential because I just did a test and the obvious occurs, namely that if a short description is added below the infobox, anyone with the css required to see a description will see two of them. Presumably MediaWiki would only use the second, but it is not satisfactory for there to be two conflicting descriptions, with the easily seen one at the top being not applicable. Johnuniq (talk) 05:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ah. I'm curious actually, how much the css is important though. Only expect editors/people who know more about short descriptions to use it. Because it'd be quite a bit of effort to add that parameter whenever a custom short description is added, and you can also use a gadget to show the short descriptions (showing only one) which seems the more reader focused way to do it. I personally only enabled the css to check the testcases; otherwise I use the gadget. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- I have TheDJ's opt-in gadget, Galobtter's js script and the css active at the same time, to keep track of everything as they get amended. Most people will probably opt for the gadget, but it is incompatible with the assessment gadget, they both try to occupy the same space, and whichever comes last takes it over. Galobtter's slightly modified script has the same problem. I am hoping that some time one will be fixed, but meanwhile the css is there as a backup. At the moment being able to see both a template included short description and a local short description has its uses for maintenance, but Johnuniq has a good point that a "no short description" parameter for templates might be helpful if it is not too difficult to implement. There will be several more templates which could usefully be used to add short descriptions, so it would be good to sort this out sooner rather than later, but I don't see it as a major bug or dealbreaker. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- I'm beginning to think there should be a module to implement {{short description}}. It would have entry points to allow it to be used to implement the main template, or the code at the top of {{Infobox settlement/sandbox}} which generates an automatic description, or similar code for other templates. A module can efficiently implement all the logic required to handle a "no short description" parameter and more. Johnuniq (talk) 07:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Johnuniq, Unfortunately I have no idea what this means. Could you be a bit more specific? · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:08, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- In brief, I would create Module:Short description and the existing {{short description}} would be replaced with very short wikitext that calls the module. Also, the infobox would have very short wikitext that calls a different function in the module. The module would output whatever wikitext is needed. It would efficiently implement the logic (if this then that) needed. Doing logic in template wikitext is ugly. I'll need a while to digest Galobtter's proposal below, except to observe that there is quite a lot of pushback against merging infoboxes so it might take quite some time before one module to handles them all. Johnuniq (talk) 09:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hmm? This wouldn't involve merging infoboxes, would use/replace existing {{infobox}} call with module:infobox that looks for parentargs Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- I don't know what work needs to be done to make all/most infoboxes use module:infobox. All I'm saying is that the output would need to be very close to the current results, or some long discussions would be needed to get a change. See Template talk:Infobox writer#Convert to wrapper for a brief discussion (there have been more like that) showing that even minor changes may not be welcome. Johnuniq (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- all infoboxes allready use module:infobox. just replace the call to make it direct than through {{infobox}} Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:37, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I don't know what work needs to be done to make all/most infoboxes use module:infobox. All I'm saying is that the output would need to be very close to the current results, or some long discussions would be needed to get a change. See Template talk:Infobox writer#Convert to wrapper for a brief discussion (there have been more like that) showing that even minor changes may not be welcome. Johnuniq (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hmm? This wouldn't involve merging infoboxes, would use/replace existing {{infobox}} call with module:infobox that looks for parentargs Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- In brief, I would create Module:Short description and the existing {{short description}} would be replaced with very short wikitext that calls the module. Also, the infobox would have very short wikitext that calls a different function in the module. The module would output whatever wikitext is needed. It would efficiently implement the logic (if this then that) needed. Doing logic in template wikitext is ugly. I'll need a while to digest Galobtter's proposal below, except to observe that there is quite a lot of pushback against merging infoboxes so it might take quite some time before one module to handles them all. Johnuniq (talk) 09:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Johnuniq, Unfortunately I have no idea what this means. Could you be a bit more specific? · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:08, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- The gadget should be relatively easy to fix, and it works as long as you're fine with it being a tad lower; what I'm thinking is instead of a disable short description parameter there should be a
|short description=parameter in the infobox that overrides the auto-generated one.
- I'm beginning to think there should be a module to implement {{short description}}. It would have entry points to allow it to be used to implement the main template, or the code at the top of {{Infobox settlement/sandbox}} which generates an automatic description, or similar code for other templates. A module can efficiently implement all the logic required to handle a "no short description" parameter and more. Johnuniq (talk) 07:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- I have TheDJ's opt-in gadget, Galobtter's js script and the css active at the same time, to keep track of everything as they get amended. Most people will probably opt for the gadget, but it is incompatible with the assessment gadget, they both try to occupy the same space, and whichever comes last takes it over. Galobtter's slightly modified script has the same problem. I am hoping that some time one will be fixed, but meanwhile the css is there as a backup. At the moment being able to see both a template included short description and a local short description has its uses for maintenance, but Johnuniq has a good point that a "no short description" parameter for templates might be helpful if it is not too difficult to implement. There will be several more templates which could usefully be used to add short descriptions, so it would be good to sort this out sooner rather than later, but I don't see it as a major bug or dealbreaker. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ah. I'm curious actually, how much the css is important though. Only expect editors/people who know more about short descriptions to use it. Because it'd be quite a bit of effort to add that parameter whenever a custom short description is added, and you can also use a gadget to show the short descriptions (showing only one) which seems the more reader focused way to do it. I personally only enabled the css to check the testcases; otherwise I use the gadget. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Actually, that is essential because I just did a test and the obvious occurs, namely that if a short description is added below the infobox, anyone with the css required to see a description will see two of them. Presumably MediaWiki would only use the second, but it is not satisfactory for there to be two conflicting descriptions, with the easily seen one at the top being not applicable. Johnuniq (talk) 05:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- It would be better if the infobox had a "no short description" parameter so (if needed) the normal short description template at the top of the article would work. Johnuniq (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- You'd have to put {{Short description}} with the description below the infobox Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- In fact, we could make it so that all infoboxes have a short description parameter, for consistency and reducing confusion. And otherwise you'd have to add "no short description" to many transclusions of an infobox template if autodescriptions are added to it after people have added regular descriptions; instead, if there is an infobox, people should always use the
|short description=parameter, not {{short description}} directly. If later that infobox is amended to have auto descriptions, everything will still work.
- In fact, we could make it so that all infoboxes have a short description parameter, for consistency and reducing confusion. And otherwise you'd have to add "no short description" to many transclusions of an infobox template if autodescriptions are added to it after people have added regular descriptions; instead, if there is an infobox, people should always use the
- If infobox templates were converted to use module:infobox directly, then this could be done without adding the same code to every infobox template; instead code for that could be added to module:infobox (would also help with some other stuff I've done and planning on Module:Infobox/sandbox..) Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:27, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
I've added a conditional parameter "No_short_description" to the sandbox: with "yes", no automatic short description will be shown, otherwise the automatic one will be used. This needs testing and probably improving. Fram (talk) 09:48, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- I've made it a
|short description=nowhich is IMO less unwieldy, and made it so that|short description=also can set the short description if it isn't no Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:03, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
May we add this to the template? Fram (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- It looks good to me. My earlier comment about merging infoboxes was my misunderstanding due to comparing the wrong wikitext versions. I can't see an easy way to get a lot of sample infoboxes and run the new code over them. That would be helpful because any problems won't easily be seen in articles. However, bold may be the way to go—it would be easy to revert although a bit painful due to the 476,538 transclusions. Johnuniq (talk) 07:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I pointed out above that the main problem is things like "Consolidated city county in California" creating things like "Consolidated city county in California in California". I think I just figured out a solution to filter that out..see the new sandbox. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll look at that later. If it can be done in template wikitext, good. However, that kind of thing would be much better done in a module along the lines of my comment above. Johnuniq (talk) 08:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Already made it into a module after frustration haha. See Module:Infobox_settlement_short_description Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I guess it doesn't matter but rather than use a module name that only suits this application, it might be better to use a more generic module that could be expanded to handle other infoboxes. There is sure to be some common code. Also, if that module contained the logic for {{short description}}, there would be no need to use expandTemplate. I should either edit the module or comment on its talk but I only have time to comment here at the moment. Why bother passing parameters to the module? Why not have the module pick out what it needs? A couple of the finds should be
string.find(s, search, 1, true)sosearchis not a regex. Won't spaces be needed after the commas instring.format? It is convenient to put the items in a numbered table then use table.concat. I can look at that later. Johnuniq (talk) 10:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)- Will do the fixes, thanks. I was thinking of a generic module, but I couldn't overtly think of common code. I used frame:ExpandTemplate didn't want code duplication - would be annoying to make changes to both if something changes in the short description template, though indeed would be better not use expandTemplate. Probably better to to make Template:Short description into a module. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- actually, now that I think of it, there is some common code Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I guess it doesn't matter but rather than use a module name that only suits this application, it might be better to use a more generic module that could be expanded to handle other infoboxes. There is sure to be some common code. Also, if that module contained the logic for {{short description}}, there would be no need to use expandTemplate. I should either edit the module or comment on its talk but I only have time to comment here at the moment. Why bother passing parameters to the module? Why not have the module pick out what it needs? A couple of the finds should be
- Already made it into a module after frustration haha. See Module:Infobox_settlement_short_description Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll look at that later. If it can be done in template wikitext, good. However, that kind of thing would be much better done in a module along the lines of my comment above. Johnuniq (talk) 08:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I pointed out above that the main problem is things like "Consolidated city county in California" creating things like "Consolidated city county in California in California". I think I just figured out a solution to filter that out..see the new sandbox. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Please do not use Lua for things that can be implemented in Wikitext. I've nominated Module:Infobox settlement short description for deletion, and plan to nominate a Module:Short description if it is created as well. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- Why? Is there a guideline that says that wikitext is better than lua? Not one I've heard of.. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:30, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- And how would making template:short description into a module so it can be conveniently accessed by other modules a problem? Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:31, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
I've added it to the template. Feel free to revrt if it causes problems of course (or improve if possible). First checks look OK, but this is used very widely so more checks are needed. Fram (talk) 10:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
There is some issue with the "type" or "setlement type" parameter not always showing, for example Astoria, Oregon says "Clatsop, Oregon, United States" instead of "City in Clatsop, Oregon, United States", and Aalen says "in Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany" instead of "Town in Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany". As most of these are still an improvement over what we had, and the actual infobox works like a charm, I don't think this is a reason to revert the addition of the "short description", but if someone can irmpove this they are welcome to!
More problematic seems to be that a local description is overruled by this template (see Brussels for an example where the template-generated description is wrong on multiple accounts, and a local one is needed). The local description must get precedence. Fram (talk) 11:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I was just about to ask if the method described above to override with a local short description is still valid. Clearly it is, and as you say, a local short description must take precedence. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- Ideally, a local short description would completely suppress the infobox generated short description, but this is a nice to have rather than a must have feature. A possibility would be to have a switch of some kind in the infobox, like
localdescription=trueto disable the autodescription. This would be less convenient than an automatic method, but better than no override at all. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Now that this is implemented, can someone please update the documentation subpage to explain why and how to use it? Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:50, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- I speak under correction here - @Fram: will know - but as I understand it, there is nothing that the user needs to do at this point, as it is entirely automatic. Therefore it should not be necessary to provide any instructions. If you want to override the automated short description with a custom short description, use {{short description}} in the usual way, but place it below the infobox. This requirement may be superseded if someone works out a better way. CSS will show both short descriptions, but only the last one will be returned by the API. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:03, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, adding the "short description" template below the infobox indeed works, see Brussels for an example. The documentation needs to be updated to indicate this. Fram (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- I hate the idea of sometimes have {{short description}} at the top and sometimes after the infobox. Why not use what I think the infobox built-in code does? You could:
- Put
|short_description=noin the infobox and {{short description}} at the top of the page; or - Put
|short_description=descriptionin the infobox and omit {{short description}}.
- Put
- Johnuniq (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- I have asked at Phabricator whether it would be practicable to store only the first instance of a magic word in the description property. Still waiting for an answer, but that might be a fix to the problem of multiple instances, and would give the top one priority. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
- I hate the idea of sometimes have {{short description}} at the top and sometimes after the infobox. Why not use what I think the infobox built-in code does? You could:
- Thank you, adding the "short description" template below the infobox indeed works, see Brussels for an example. The documentation needs to be updated to indicate this. Fram (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Glitch
The short description wikitext at the top of the infobox looks like this:
{{#ifeq:{{{short_description|}}}|...
{{{settlement_type|{{{type|Place}}}}}}...}}
{{#if:{{#invoke:String|match|...}}{{#if:{{{4|}}}|{{#invoke:String|find|{{{1|}}}|{{{4|}}...
{{Infobox
The last {{{4|}} needs another }. There is another minor issue so I thought I'd ask about that so any changes can be done in one edit.
The above is four physical lines. Examining the output of an infobox (I used Oborishte) at Special:ExpandTemplates shows it looks like this:
<div class="shortdescription nomobile noexcerpt noprint searchaux" style="display:none">Village in Bulgaria</div>[[Category:articles with short description]] <table class="infobox geography vcard" style="width:22em;width:23em">...
In other words, there is a newline at the end of the description + category, and another blank line after that. Shouldn't they be removed? Johnuniq (talk) 03:56, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hmm. Now that I think about it, the above uses parameters 1, 3 and 4. What are they? Perhaps they used to make sense in an earlier design of adding an automatic short description? These parameters will always be undefined in a proper infobox settlement. Johnuniq (talk) 09:02, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- The former Module:Infobox settlement short description used numbered parameters. When I wikitextified and substituted the module in after the tfd, I forgot to update the numbers to names for the tracking category (but remembered for the rest of the code). Changes made in sandbox. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Fram, Galobtter, and Pbsouthwood: Please check the recent fix at {{Infobox settlement/sandbox}}. Is anything else needed? If not, update the main template? You might also consider my other comments (above and below) dated 4 May 2018. Johnuniq (talk) 23:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- Johnuniq, I am afraid that I am unable to understand what the code does, so must leave it to others to make useful comment. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Fram, Galobtter, and Pbsouthwood: Please check the recent fix at {{Infobox settlement/sandbox}}. Is anything else needed? If not, update the main template? You might also consider my other comments (above and below) dated 4 May 2018. Johnuniq (talk) 23:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- The former Module:Infobox settlement short description used numbered parameters. When I wikitextified and substituted the module in after the tfd, I forgot to update the numbers to names for the tracking category (but remembered for the rest of the code). Changes made in sandbox. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Tracking categories
Ijuí is an example of an article in Category:Infobox settlement pages with bad settlement type which is currently a red link. It is also in Category:Pages with script errors although the error is not visible. Examining the HTML source shows "Lua error: Unmatched close-bracket at pattern character 9" in function "v" at mw.ustring.lua:84: in function "match". Any thoughts on what's going on? Johnuniq (talk) 04:49, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: I reckon this is because everything isn't plain texted before being used in string match and because things aren't passed as plain when necessary. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:21, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Ugly ugly, is how the code now that I've done the likely requisite changes.. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:22, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry that I had to disappear for a while. I have been monitoring some error tracking categories for a few hours due to some stuff I'm working on and was happy to see that there were no articles with script errors. Then it lit up with hundreds of articles so after a quick check I reverted the recent change which I have not yet had time to look at. To see the problem, edit the 07:58, 6 May 2018 version of the template and paste "Ajaccio" under "Preview page with this template" and click Show preview. At the bottom, that shows "Hidden categories: Category:Pages with script errors" although no error is visible on the page. Examining the HTML source of the preview page shows:
ScribuntoErrors Lua error: Unmatched close-bracket at pattern character 10. Backtrace: [C]: in function "v" mw.ustring.lua:84: in function "match" Module:String:178: in function "chunk" mw.lua:511: ?
- I might not have time to think about the issue for a while. Johnuniq (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
@Galobtter: I examined Ajaccio. It uses {{Infobox French commune}} which calls {{Infobox settlement}}. That gives the following results for the second String|match in the recent edit:
settlement_type = [[Prefectures of France|Prefecture]] and [[Communes of France|commune]]
subdivision_name = [[France]]
Previewing
{{#invoke:String|match|[[Prefectures of France|Prefecture]] and [[Communes of France|commune]]|[[France]]|ignore_errors=1}}
gives
Lua error: Unmatched close-bracket at pattern character 10.
Adding |plain=true to string|match might fix it? By the way, there are a couple of places in the wikitext which have a double pipe ("||"). Perhaps they should be just one pipe? Johnuniq (talk) 09:18, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: Yeah, I did that in the sandbox already, I also plain texted it as was already done in the module, so the search would correctly be be {{#invoke:String|match|Prefecture and commune|France|ignore_errors=1}} Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:19, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- But it still needs plain=true to handle cases like a percent or dash in the pattern. Johnuniq (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah I did both plain=true and making it plain text Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- But it still needs plain=true to handle cases like a percent or dash in the pattern. Johnuniq (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
So i've implemented it, no errors in the category now that I see, some bugs and stuff to fix like the category isn't filling as it should. But I'll be busy for the next ~10 days or so so when that's over I'll see about fixing most of it up Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Human Development Index
Just need to add human development index (HDI) in this infobox, to provide more information about the settlement. Thanks in Advance. Nirjal stha (talk) 08:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Small elements
Please remove small elements as per MOS:ACCESS#Text/MOS:FONTSIZE where it says "Avoid using smaller font sizes in elements that already use a smaller font size, such as infoboxes, navboxes and reference sections." --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- Yes. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Is it possible to turn off the auto-conversion of total area, etc?
Just now I noticed this at zh:拉普蘭 (瑞典). My concern is actually not about enwiki, but about elsewhere, such as zhwiki; I'm asking here all because you guys created this template and you probably know best about it. Granted, it makes sense to auto-convert and display both km and mi values for those US-related (or broader, those English country-related) things. However, what if the thing is not American/British/Commonwealth -related? I mean, what if both the article subject and the particular wikipedia language are of countries that adopt metric system? Is there a way to turn off the conversion and only display km? Whether it is easily resolved, or it requires a bit of coding into the template/module, please let me know. Thank you very much! -- SzMithrandir ❈ Ered Luin ❈ 22:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- The conversions are there not because a certain article is American/British/Commonwealth -related, but because American/British/Commonwealth readers may read them. Even if a country is 100% metric, we still show the imperial units for the sake of American readers. Likewise, American articles also show metric units to help European readers understand the units. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:18, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- @P199:Sorry for my vague utterance afore. Yes, I know the point you're talking about, and I agree. I'm actually asking you guys for technical help, about how I could turn this auto-conversion off, at other Wikipedia language sites, namely zh.wiki, the Chinese Wikipedia. -- SzMithrandir ❈ Ered Luin ❈ 02:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Short_description problem
All templates that use this template need to be coded (and documented) with |short_description= so that the default auto-generated short description can be overridden, so people do not add redundant and conflicting short descriptions via template, as I just encountered at Acre, Israel. This template's own documentation should include a note that this is necessary.
We also need the ability to completely suppress the infobox creating one, with |short_description=none, so that {{Short description}} can be used (this will be desirable in several circumstances, the most obvious of which is a long-running "slow-revert" battle that keeps adding then removing an infobox, and taking the short description with it).
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Doesn't this template already have the feature you are requesting (except using "no" instead of "none") {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:18, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- And as the 'noreplace' keyword is now implemented in the magic word, doesn't the stand-alone {{Short description}} automatically override the short description in this infobox, making the problem of infobox removal moot in that case? --RexxS (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Choice of infobox on articles about constituencies
Please see this discussion and follow-up RfC concerning the relative merits of {{infobox constituency}} and {{infobox settlement}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:13, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
Adding Economic parameters
I think it'd be a good idea to add certain economic parameters like GDP and Budget (if a political entity) - perhaps to separate sections or to a new 'economic' section? These parameters tend to be among the most important when describing political units, and including them as parameter options increases the accessibility of this information where relevant. Sahrin (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
Pacific Northwest short description
Just wanted to report that the generated short description is broken on the above article. Opencooper (talk) 10:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Coat of arms link
Ciudad Victoria has been linking to disambiguation page Coat of arms of Victoria. It's using Infobox settlement with |official_name=Victoria, which seems correct according to the documentation. There is no article on the coat of arms of this particular Victoria. I'm aware that |shield_link= could divert the wikilink to a different article, if we had one, and I've abused it to create a redlink, but is there any way to suppress the link entirely? Certes (talk) 00:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Certes: The
|shield_link=and|official_name=parameters are passed to Template:Infobox settlement/link which has a series of tests to determine the page to be linked. The first test is on|shield_link=; when that is blank or absent, it then tests to see if the page linked by[[Coat of arms of {{PAGENAME}}]]exists. In this case, Coat of arms of Ciudad Victoria does not exist, so it then checks the|official_name=parameter; if that is not blank, it tests to see if the page linked by[[Coat of arms of {{{official_name}}}]]exists. This article has|official_name=Victoriaso it's looking for[[Coat of arms of Victoria]]i.e. Coat of arms of Victoria which does exist, so the link is to[[Coat of arms of Victoria|Coat of arms]]i.e. Coat of arms. - Whilst it might therefore seem that the problem lies with Template:Infobox settlement/link, that subtemplate is used several times within
{{Infobox settlement}}and so amending it could have a knock-on effect in other areas. It might be best to create Coat of arms of Ciudad Victoria, initially as a redirect to Ciudad Victoria#Coat of arms. This edit may then be reverted. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)- Thanks for the detailed explanation. I've replaced my redlink by a self link for now, which seems to work. Courtesy ping: Narky Blert. Certes (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Edit request timezone
 | This edit request to Template:Infobox settlement has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Currently the time zone is represented like: EST (UTC−5). However codes like EST are globally not very well defined. Therefore I would propose to reverse the order to UTC−5 (EST), putting the absolutely clear and unambiguous one first. −Woodstone (talk) 01:08, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. Could you put the required code in Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox and reactivate? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:45, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Although I have extensive programming experience, the syntax used here makes me hesitate to specify precise code. Especially the cases where one of the two involved parameters are missing is not totally clear to me. For someone versed in this syntax the requirement seems clear by itself. If this is not acceptable, I might give it a try, but I would need to know how I can test a template sandbox. −Woodstone (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Woodstone, I think I got it. let me know if there is a problem. Frietjes (talk) 18:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Meanwhile I found that there is some unwanted lack of symmetry. There are 4 pairs of parameters "timezone" and "utc_offset". In each pair, when Timezone is not given, nothing is produced, even if Utc_offset is present. This is counterproductive. Each should appear as and when given. However surrounding one with brackets then becomes impractical. So the best solution would be to just juxtapose them: UTC-5 EST. −Woodstone (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Woodstone, can you provide an example of the problem in Case 14: Timezones? the testcases seem to be rendering fine? Frietjes (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- My remark above applied to the original code. The way it appears at the moment seems fine. Thanks for taking this up.−Woodstone (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Although I have extensive programming experience, the syntax used here makes me hesitate to specify precise code. Especially the cases where one of the two involved parameters are missing is not totally clear to me. For someone versed in this syntax the requirement seems clear by itself. If this is not acceptable, I might give it a try, but I would need to know how I can test a template sandbox. −Woodstone (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Edit request
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add the following at the bottom of ‘Demographics 2’:
| rowclass112 = mergedrow
| label112 = • {{{demographics2_title8}}}
| data112 = {{#if:{{{demographics_type2|}}}
|{{#if:{{{demographics2_title8|}}}|{{{demographics2_info8|}}}}}}}
| rowclass113 = mergedrow
| label113 = • {{{demographics2_title9}}}
| data113 = {{#if:{{{demographics_type2|}}}
|{{#if:{{{demographics2_title9|}}}|{{{demographics2_info9|}}}}}}}
| rowclass114 = mergedrow
| label114 = • {{{demographics2_title10}}}
| data114 = {{#if:{{{demographics_type2|}}}
|{{#if:{{{demographics2_title10|}}}|{{{demographics2_info10|}}}}}}}
Thank you. Libhye (talk) 19:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
|label112=is already being used forTime zone. Frietjes (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)- Would it be possible to use
|label139=, which is not currently in use? At any rate, it would clearly be possible to add an eighth parameter to ‘Demographics 2’, and it is sorely needed. Libhye (talk) 11:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)- you really need to keep the numbering sequential, so I have added some numbering gaps. where would this be used? Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
- I noticed the need for it when editing North West (South African province), when I discovered only seven of my eight parameters showed up in the article. Ending a list of languages with the one spoken by 2.5% when the next one is spoken by 2.4% is misleading, and in the articles about South African provinces, listing languages down to 2.5% is necessary as a language can be spoken by such a low percentage and still be dominant in a part of the province. Libhye (talk) 13:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- I have now discovered the need for a ninth and tenth parameter as well (at Gauteng) and have edited my request accordingly. Libhye (talk) 10:41, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Done Looks good to me; I had to increment the numbers of a bunch of fields, but it seems to work fine at Gauteng's article. Enterprisey (talk!) 12:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- closing the TPER. Primefac (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- you really need to keep the numbering sequential, so I have added some numbering gaps. where would this be used? Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
- Would it be possible to use
Template-protected edit request on 14 September 2018
| This edit request to Template:Infobox settlement has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
{{Country abbreviation|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1|{{{subdivision_name2|{{{subdivision_name3|}}}}}}}}} }} with {{ISO 3166 code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1|{{{subdivision_name2|{{{subdivision_name3|}}}}}}}}} }} as it's 1) It's more complete then Template:Country abbreviation and 2) Template:Country abbreviation ends up using it if doesn't have the country and subdivision in the module (Module:Country extract). – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Replace
|Coordinates{{#if:{{{coor_pinpoint|{{{coor_type|}}}}}}| ({{{coor_pinpoint|{{{coor_type|}}}}}})}}: {{#invoke:Coordinates|coordinsert|{{{coordinates|}}}|type:city{{#if:{{{population_total|}}}|{{#iferror:{{#expr:{{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}}+1}}||({{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}})}}}}|{{#if:{{{subdivision_name|}}}|region:{{Country abbreviation|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1|{{{subdivision_name2|{{{subdivision_name3|}}}}}}}}} }} }} }}{{{coordinates_footnotes|}}} }}
With
|Coordinates{{#if:{{{coor_pinpoint|{{{coor_type|}}}}}}| ({{{coor_pinpoint|{{{coor_type|}}}}}})}}:{{#invoke:Coordinates|coordinsert|{{{coordinates|}}}|type:city{{#if:{{{population_total|}}}|{{#iferror:{{#expr:{{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}}+1}}||({{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}})}}}}|{{#if:{{{subdivision_name|}}}|{{#if:{{#invoke:Ustring|match|{{{coordinates|}}}|region:}}||{{#if:{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}}}|region:{{delink|{{#if:{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1}}}|nocat=true}}|{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1}}}}}|{{#if:{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name2}}}|nocat=true}}|{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name2}}}}}|{{#if:{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name3}}}|nocat=true}}|{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name3}}}}}|{{#invoke:ISO 3166|code|{{{subdivision_name}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}{{{coordinates_footnotes|}}}}}
As
1) It allows the coordinate module to get the region parameter even when the first subdivision isn't recognized by ISO or even when all the subdivision aren't
- An example can be seen at Template:Infobox settlement/testcases#Case 8: Toronto Were the first region isn't ISO so it uses the second region (Ontario) instead, whereas the live version doesn't make any region for the coordinates.
2) It prevent the code from running when the region is already specified to improve efficiency.
- Adds {{#if:{{#invoke:Ustring|match|{{{coordinates|}}}|region:}}||''code''}}
3) It uses the module instead of templates to improve load time and efficiency.
- {{Country abbreviation}} vs {{#invoke:ISO 3166|code}} (Template:Country abbreviation vs Module:ISO 3166)
You can see the test cases at Template:Infobox settlement/testcases and my edits at Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox and the differences between the live and sandbox version at diff. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 21:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Please link the templates so each person who views this doesn't need to hunt around. Is the proposed change in the sandbox? What tests have been performed? Johnuniq (talk) 00:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: I added a new link to make navigation easier, I show example in the sandbox, and I ran the test cases and they new edit passes, I should note that the current method may be broken when in some countries and sub-pages the current method relied on have been deleted, and more may be deleted soon, so we should transition to ISO 3166 templates (such as Template:ISO 3166 code as they are more reliable. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 04:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- BrandonXLF would it be possible for Template:ISO 3166 code to try to parse more than one pair, using the first valid pair? for example,
{{ISO 3166 code|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1|}}}|{{{subdivision_name2|}}}|{{{subdivision_name3|}}}}}? I ask because, articles like Ahdid would be able to get the correct ISO code in that case. also, as far as I can tell, this region information is only used if the associated{{coord}}doesn't have region information. would it be possible to have the "coord insert" call the "ISO 3166 module" instead, but only when necessary? Frietjes (talk) 19:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)- @Frietjes: Template:ISO 3166 code takes as many sub divisions as Template:Country abbreviation, for the rest I'll see what I can do. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:51, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: I made it so it always shows the region, if you want, I can make it so it only shows the region when It doesn't show the coordinates. Theres some good example at Template:Infobox_settlement/testcases. I also made it use the first valid pair and use Module:ISO 3166. All that changes are in the sandbox and the diff can be seen here. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 00:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:BrandonXLF, there appears to be more in that diff. in any event, I still think that we should pass the country and subdivisions to "coordinsert" and have it call the various modules only if there is no region in the corresponding {{coord}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Coordinsert doesn't need that information, how is it now? It only shows the region information when there's no coordinates. I think it better to always show the region information, but this way is fine. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:57, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:BrandonXLF, there appears to be more in that diff. in any event, I still think that we should pass the country and subdivisions to "coordinsert" and have it call the various modules only if there is no region in the corresponding {{coord}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: I made it so it always shows the region, if you want, I can make it so it only shows the region when It doesn't show the coordinates. Theres some good example at Template:Infobox_settlement/testcases. I also made it use the first valid pair and use Module:ISO 3166. All that changes are in the sandbox and the diff can be seen here. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 00:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Template:ISO 3166 code takes as many sub divisions as Template:Country abbreviation, for the rest I'll see what I can do. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:51, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- BrandonXLF would it be possible for Template:ISO 3166 code to try to parse more than one pair, using the first valid pair? for example,
- @Johnuniq: I added a new link to make navigation easier, I show example in the sandbox, and I ran the test cases and they new edit passes, I should note that the current method may be broken when in some countries and sub-pages the current method relied on have been deleted, and more may be deleted soon, so we should transition to ISO 3166 templates (such as Template:ISO 3166 code as they are more reliable. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 04:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
User:BrandonXLF, let's start by looking at the call to coordinsert in this template: {{#invoke:Coordinates|coordinsert|{{{coordinates|}}}|type:city{{#if:{{{population_total|}}}|{{#iferror:{{#expr:{{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}}+1}}||({{formatnum:{{{population_total}}}|R}})}}}}|{{#if:{{{subdivision_name|}}}|region:{{Country abbreviation|{{{subdivision_name}}}|{{{subdivision_name1|{{{subdivision_name2|{{{subdivision_name3|}}}}}}}}} }} }} }}. this passes (1) the coordinates template, (2) a type: value augmented with population information (3) region: information derived from {{country abbreviation}} using subdivision information. now, let's look at what coordinsert does with this information by inspecting Module:Coordinates. that module function appends this type: and region: values to the coord parameters, but only if they are not already specified. to see how this works, try the following examples to see what you get for output:
{{Infobox settlement
| name = Example 1
| subdivision_type = [[Country]]
| subdivision_name = [[Netherlands]]
| subdivision_type1 = [[Provinces of the Netherlands|Province]]
| subdivision_name1 = [[North Holland]]
| coordinates = {{coord|52|22|N|4|54|E|region:NL_type:city}}
| population_total = 851,573
}}
{{Infobox settlement
| name = Example 2
| subdivision_type = [[Country]]
| subdivision_name = [[Netherlands]]
| subdivision_type1 = [[Provinces of the Netherlands|Province]]
| subdivision_name1 = [[North Holland]]
| coordinates = {{coord|52|22|N|4|54|E}}
| population_total = 851,573
}}
in the first case, the coord URL has the parameters region:NL_type:city, but in the second case, the coord URL has the parameters type:city(851573)_region:NL-NH. so, in the first case we didn't need the information provided by {{country abbreviation}}, but we tried to calculate it anyway. to circumvent this inefficiency, we just need a way to call a "coordinsert" type function with country/subdivision information and have that the coordinsert call the {{country abbreviation}}. Frietjes (talk) 20:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes:How's that? It should only run when needed (when coordinates are specified and region: is not). – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 02:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- yes. Frietjes (talk) 12:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Just a little more work. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 12:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: How does it look now? I think it's good. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:11, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- These edits can be seen at work in Case 8: Toronto where currently the region doesn't work but in the sandbox it uses the first ISO region Ontario. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- since this feature is going to be used more than once, it would be better to put this directly into a "coordinsert" function, probably in Module:ISO 3166, since the "coordinsert" code is fairly small. Frietjes (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: So add a function to Module:ISO 3166 that finds the first proper subdivision? – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:05, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Just a little more work. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 12:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- yes. Frietjes (talk) 12:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- There is a fair amount of discussion about the proposed change. Just to keep TPER clean, I'm closing this, but feel free to a) continue the above discussion, and b) re-open the request if necessary. Primefac (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- The code is ready to be implemented. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 02:22, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- the code in the sandbox is not the solution, eight calls to the same module means there should be a separate entry point into Module:ISO 3166 to do everything. also, Module:ISO 3166 uses "getArgs" which means it is processing all the args passed to infobox settlement, and not just the ones which are explicitly being passed. Frietjes (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- this change looks better to me, and appears to work as intended, but without multiple calls to the various modules and templates. comments? Frietjes (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: It looks good, but I wonder if it belongs in Module:ISO 3166 maybe having it Module:Coordinates would be better? – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:15, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Or rename the function to findcode as it could be used in situations were users don't know the proper subdivision name so they can but in a variety. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- It looks good to me, and I think the placement in Module:ISO 3166 makes sense since it's calling the functions in Module:ISO 3166 multiple times. It looks like it only calls Module:Coordinates once at the end. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Plastikspork: But it doesn't have anything to do with ISO 3166. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 12:23, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- it adds the ISO code for a region to the coordinates call. Frietjes (talk) 13:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have updated the main template; we can always move it to a different module if necessary. Frietjes (talk) 20:21, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Plastikspork: But it doesn't have anything to do with ISO 3166. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 12:23, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- It looks good to me, and I think the placement in Module:ISO 3166 makes sense since it's calling the functions in Module:ISO 3166 multiple times. It looks like it only calls Module:Coordinates once at the end. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- The code is ready to be implemented. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 02:22, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Proposed addition to Infobox settlement: telephone exchange
Infobox settlement already contains very useful parameters for a settlement's postal code(s) and area code(s). Another attribute that many settlements have is one or more telephone exchange numbers. It would be quite useful to add a parameter for the telephone exchange to this infobox.
An exchange is a quite reliable way to identify the location of a telephone landline, and the place of registration of a cell phone number.
In case you're not familiar with how telephone exchanges work in the U.S., here are two examples:
- In the phone number (208) 879-5555, the three-digit exchange number 879 identifies the location as Challis, Idaho. It would be nice to be able to put the following in Challis' infobox:
- | area_code = 208
- | exchange = 879
- Most Idaho exchanges can be found here: Area_codes_208_and_986#List_of_exchanges
- In the phone number (605) 280-5555, the three-digit exchange number 280 identifies the location as Pierre, South Dakota. It would be nice to be able to put the following in Pierre's infobox:
- | area_code = 605
- | exchange = 224, 945, 280, 295, 222
- South Dakota exchanges can be found here: Area_code_605
Implementing this addition
I don't know how to add an additional parameter to an infobox. Could someone assist me with this? GPS Pilot (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- First you would need to gain consensus. I doubt that will happen. The exchange is an archaic bit of information of little use in today's society. Phone numbers have been portable for several years now. I could move from Challis to Boise and retain the same phone number. Further, the exchange only applies to phone service from the franchised landline provider in the community. If you get phone service from an alternative phone provider, it will not have that exchange. Nor do the vast majority of cellphones. A phone number is 7 digits, not 4 + an exchange. That concept died a long time ago. Not to mention that this infobox is used in most settlement articles, and most settlements are not in the US. John from Idegon (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Don't start a war. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:36, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Nice, Redrose64. The Simpsons rule forever.
- The exchange is an archaic bit of information of little use in today's society
- Not correct. Every U.S. phone number, landline or cell phone, has an exchange as well as an area code. The exchange is no more archaic than the area code.
- Even if it were true that cell phones don't use exchanges (it is not), please note that a 2017 Center for Disease Control National Health Information Survey found that 45.9% of American households still use a landline phone. Schools, businesses, libraries, police stations, etc. also will remain heavy users of landlines for the foreseeable future. So information about a settlement's landline exchange(s) will remain quite relevant for some time to come.
- Phone numbers have been portable for several years now. I could move from Challis to Boise and retain the same phone number.
- Correct, which is why I wrote that the exchange allows you to identify "the place of registration of a cell phone number."
- the exchange only applies to phone service from the franchised landline provider in the community. If you get phone service from an alternative phone provider, it will not have that exchange. Nor do the vast majority of cellphones. A phone number is 7 digits, not 4 + an exchange. That concept died a long time ago.
- That is not correct. I have multiple cell phone numbers, and in all of them, the exchange identifies the city in which I registered the cell phone. For example, I bought one phone near Milton, PA, and the exchange in its phone number is 412. If you go here, you can see that 412 is an exchange reserved by Sprint Spectrum L.P. for phones registered in or near Milton, PA. No landline has ever been assigned to exchange 412 in area code 570.
- Many phone systems in the U.S. require you to dial 10 digits, even when calling within the same area code, and even where there is no area code overlay plan in place, because they do not consider the seven-digit number to a complete phone number. If you believe the exchange concept died a long time ago (in fact it has not died at all), then please make a correction to North_American_Numbering_Plan#Modern_plan, which says "for example, 234-235-5678 is a valid telephone number with area code 234, central office prefix (exchange) 235, and line number 5678."
- this infobox is used in most settlement articles, and most settlements are not in the US.
- Correct. That is why the infobox contains a parameter named "postal_code," not "zip_code". You don't seem to know much about telephone exchanges. Other countries use them too, but they are not always three digits as in the U.S. For example, I recently visited the small village of Taynuilt, Scotland, where the area code is 01866 and the exchange is 822.
- Even if some of the points I've made were incorrect, which they are not, there would be no harm in adding an optional parameter, which no one is forced to use, to an infobox. Compare and contrast the usefulness of the proposed parameter with some of the parameters currently in Infobox settlement:
- flag - Minimally useful, because most settlements do not have their own flag
- anthem - Not useful; even fewer have their own anthem
- established_title7 - This would be used for a settlement that has had six former names. I bet you can't name a single settlement that needs this parameter.
- exchange - Extremely useful; every single community in the U.S. (and many other countries) has one or more telephone exchanges.
- GPS Pilot (talk) 22:44, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
If land line ONLY, then yes/maybe. If cellphone, then no because there are numerous exchanges for cellphones. This is more useful for a smaller community, because large cities have a mountain of exchanges, and I don't want the infobox to be flooded with numerous exchanges. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:49, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
- The term "exchange" dates back to the original direct dial telephone systems installed (in the US anyway) in the 50s and 60s, when a physical pair of wires ran from each customer's phone to a centrally located building, where they were connected to a gigantic mechanical switch (the exchange) which moved in sequence in response to the electric impulses generatated by the generator attached to the dial of the telephone to physically connect the two parties to the call. They were limited not by geographic boundaries, but by their 10,000 customer capacity. For smaller communities, many of the numbers were, and still are, outside the corporate boundries of the city. So, now, not every phone in the community has the same exchange (or even 15 exchanges. Every cell carrier is assigned a batch of exchanges for a given area code, so it's quite possible for even a small community to have many assigned exchanges), AND not every number in a given exchange is in a given community. How is this information relevant to a community? It's just a piece of marginally useful trivia that will end up being a maintenance nightmare. John from Idegon (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
- My hometown has only one exchange, which has remained unchanged for over 50 years. That is hardly a "maintenance nightmare." On the other hand, my hometown (and thousands of other communities) have experienced a change of area code. I'm not going to resort to your kind of hyperbole and say that the area_code parameter is a maintenance nightmare, but it certainly demands much more maintenance than the proposed exchange parameter – which, I would remind everyone, would be entirely optional. An editor who is frightened that their settlement's exchange might change 20 years from now is not obligated to populate the proposed parameter. I plan to populate the parameter on pages I edit, but I won't take offense if it goes unpopulated in 99% of these infoboxes. A 1% usage rate would make it more popular than many of the existing parameters (see flag, anthem, and established_title7 above). I really don't understand why this very useful proposed parameter is meeting resistance, when nobody opposed the numerous completely useless parameters that are currently found in Infobox settlement.
- The term "exchange" dates back to the original direct dial telephone systems installed (in the US anyway) in the 50s and 60s, when a physical pair of wires ran from each customer's phone to a centrally located building, where they were connected to a gigantic mechanical switch (the exchange) which moved in sequence in response to the electric impulses generatated by the generator attached to the dial of the telephone to physically connect the two parties to the call.
- Correct. And in the 21st century, the term lives on, having acquired the additional meaning of a block of phone numbers allocated to cell phones that are registered in or near a particular community. Similarly, these days the term "mouse" can refer to something that contains a laser and a Bluetooth transmitter. The fact that the term dates back to a small rodent does not warrant the deletion of this article.
- How is this information relevant to a community? It's just a piece of marginally useful trivia
- Not correct. In the community where I grew up, the telephone exchange was an integral part of the community's identity (and remains so to this day). Now in my opinion, the fact that De Soto, Kansas is 1.2% covered with water is useless trivia – and apparently those who built the infobox agree, because they didn't make use of the area_water_percent parameter. But you don't see me speaking out against the area_water_percent parameter. Be a mensch.
- now, not every phone in the community has the same exchange
- Correct; as I pointed out in the above example, Pierre, SD has five exchanges. It's also true that in many communities, not every phone in the community has the same area code. And yet, I don't see anyone clamoring for abolishment of the area_code parameter. So what is your point?
- large cities have a mountain of exchanges, and I don't want the infobox to be flooded with numerous exchanges
- Not a problem, my friend. Exchanges 201 through 997 are assigned to Washington, DC. If you wanted to print pages 23-28 of a document, you wouldn't specify pages 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 in the print dialog box; you would specify pages 23-28. Similarly, the Washington, DC exchanges can be concisely listed as 201-997.
- GPS Pilot (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Edit request to native_name
| This edit request to Template:Infobox settlement has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'd like to extend the (approved) proposal to unbold |native_name= as done with {{Infobox country}} (see talk) to this template as well for consistency. Thayts ••• 19:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Short description needs settlement_type canonicalized
At present, {{Infobox Italian comune}} sets settlement_type by default to {{lang|it|[[Comune]]}}, which gives a correct result in the infobox itself. However this results in two problems in the generation of the short description. The major problem is that the {{lang}} template hides the argument, so the short description of (say) Ostuni is "in Apulia, Italy". The second is that the wikilink would end up in the short description, where it doesn't belong. The same issue probably occurs in other customers of this template. Is it possible to canonicalize these bits of syntax out of the parameter when it is used to generate the default description? David Brooks (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Update: I realize that one solution would be for the Italian comune infobox to construct an explicit short_description parameter. I can do that, but I think if the Infobox settlement template code can strip out the lang template (is that technically possible?), it would be a more robust solution, applicable to any other settlement infobox with similar coding. Can anyone comment on the feasibility? David Brooks (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think stripping out the lang template would be a bit difficult. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
autolinking the subdivisions
So I recently made a change to the template that would {{autolink}} the subdivisions. JJMC89 reverted the change citing that it "will cause WP:OVERLINKing." However, upon reviewing the WP:MOSLINK documentation, I feel pretty confident that this falls under one of the exceptions. Per MOS:REPEATLINK Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead.
So, per BRD I'd like to discuss. Personally, I think this would be a helpful change. Frankly the more that is clickable in the infobox the better, but that is just my 2 cents. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:55, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- The revert wasn't about repeating links but linking locations that shouldn't be linked. WP:OVERLINK:
the following are not usually linked: [...] The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar—unless there is a contextually important reason to link: [...] locations (e.g., United States; New York City, or just New York if the city context is already clear; London, if the context rules out London, Ontario; Japan; Brazil; Southeast Asia)
— JJMC89 (T·C) 05:48, 30 October 2018 (UTC)- @JJMC89: ah gotcha! Thanks for the follow up and explanation. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: There's also the problem that autolinking could generate a link to a disambiguation page, and the page editor would not realize it and no one else could fix it. We discussed this at the Infobox mountain talk page. This is one example where the author of Geobox created a feature without discussing it with anyone, it turned out to be a bad idea, and no one could fix the original tangled Geobox code. Let's not maintain the bad old features of Geobox. —hike395 (talk) 09:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Hike395 and JJMC89: look at that... BRD is working as intended! :-) You both made excellent points that I had overlooked. Much appreciated! I now agree auto-linking is not the way to go. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:31, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: There's also the problem that autolinking could generate a link to a disambiguation page, and the page editor would not realize it and no one else could fix it. We discussed this at the Infobox mountain talk page. This is one example where the author of Geobox created a feature without discussing it with anyone, it turned out to be a bad idea, and no one could fix the original tangled Geobox code. Let's not maintain the bad old features of Geobox. —hike395 (talk) 09:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- @JJMC89: ah gotcha! Thanks for the follow up and explanation. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Add support for an embedded infobox
Can we add a param at the bottom such as {{{module}}} or {{{embed}}} that would allow for embedding another infobox into this one? I'm looking at French Quarter specifically at the moment... --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:13, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
- Zackmann08 the standard method that I have seen is to embed it in the
|footnotes=. the main downside of embedding any infoboxes in this one is that this one uses the geography class, so you get some extra horizontal dividers in the child that you may not have expected. Frietjes (talk) 12:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)- @Frietjes: gotcha. Thanks for the note! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:30, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
No defaults?
Sorry to keep bugging people! I'm doing a lot of conversions from {{Geobox}} to this template and keep noticing stuff. Per the threads above, I just want to make sure I'm not missing something before I make a change. So the note this time... I'm seeing a number of parameters that don't have a default for their label. For example, {{{postal_code}}} and {{{postal_code_type}}}. There is no default for {{{postal_code_type}}} in the template. So if you provide a postal_code but not a type the code isn't displayed at all. Obviously having the type is important, but I'm curious why there isn't a default? Same for {{{established_title}}} and {{{established_date}}}. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
TfD notice
| This edit request to Template:Infobox settlement has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone revert the addition of the TfD notice [1]? The "merge" advertised is actually a proposal to deprecate {{Geobox}} in favour of this template and has absolutely no bearing on what happens to this template. We don't need an irrelevant TfD notices being plastered on top of almost half a million articles. – Uanfala (talk) 19:33, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- Well, that was fast! – Uanfala (talk) 19:35, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Overriding short description in calling infobox and articles
Recalling my request above (#Short description needs settlement_type canonicalized) where the problem was a settlement_type that includes {{lang}}: I finessed the issue by adding to {{Infobox Italian comune}}:
| short_description = {{{short_description|Comune in {{#if:{{{region|}}}|{{{region}}}, Italy|Italy}}}}}
(I realized afterwards I could have used an HTML space or nbsp entity to avoid repeating the word "Italy"). That works as far as it goes. I haven't documented the new parameter because I was trying to solve this problem: if an editor adds a local short description to the article using {{short description}} or SHORTDESC, it gets prepended to the generic one. I frankly can't quite follow the meanings of parameters like "none", "no", and "noreplace", but I can't find a way to make the generic description go away if an editor provides a local one. Of course, the editor will use the new template parameter if they notice it. Is there a more foolproof coding that would force the local description to replace the generic one, or is the template parameter the best way? I may be fussing over nothing: currently none of the 8,023 articles that use this template provides another SD. But I'd like to get it right before moving on the description, and changing the similar issues in {{Infobox frazione}} and others. David Brooks (talk) 19:13, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Because the short description in {{Infobox settlement}} is passed the parameter "noreplace", any other short description is used as the actual description displayed instead of the automatic one generated by {{Infobox settlement}} or through {{Infobox Italian comune}}; however, the display through CSS will still show two descriptions (one can see the actual description used through User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper :)). Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:28, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Galobtter: OK, I'll document that an editor can safely use either route. I'm unsure whether to mention the possibility of CSS confusion; few people will see it after all. And thanks for reminding me to import your script. David Brooks (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Another infobox within this infobox?
I was wondering if there is any way to put an infobox like {{Infobox Chinese}} inside {{Infobox settlement}} down near the bottom? I played around putting it in "blank_name_sec1"/"blank_info_sec1" but the formatting is off. Are there technical or other reasons this should not be done? An example where both templates are in use that might look better combined is here. — AjaxSmack 02:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- @AjaxSmack: can you provide some source code for what you are trying to do? Happy to help. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:26, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- the supported method is using the transcription parameters, which I agree is sub-optional, since it requires exactly typing out all the labels. the embedding method shown here, is better, but has some spurious horizontal lines. I believe we can improve the format of the embedding method. let me see what we can do. Frietjes (talk) 14:21, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- this works as well. some spurious horizontal lines which could be removed by adding
|rowclassN=mergedrowto {{Infobox Chinese/Chinese}}, but I don't think you can remove all of them without changes to this template. Frietjes (talk) 14:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)- Thanks for your help. Your second iteration (with placement at the bottom of the infobox) looks best. Where would I add
|rowclassN=mergedrowto {{Infobox Chinese/Chinese}} and what syntax would I use in the embedded template? — AjaxSmack 01:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)- AjaxSmack, you would need to add
|rowclass2=mergedtoprowfor the first row after the header,|rowclass3=mergedrowfor the second row,|rowclass4=mergedrowfor the third row, etc.. very tedious. it's possible we could put|classN=maptablein a cell in this template or maybe to the first data cell in {{Infobox Chinese}}. by my reading of MediaWiki:Common.css, this would remove the horizontal borders, but possibly not all of them. will require some testing. Frietjes (talk) 13:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- AjaxSmack, you would need to add
- Thanks for your help. Your second iteration (with placement at the bottom of the infobox) looks best. Where would I add
Discussion of motto parameter changes in sandbox
I see that a new parameter called |motto_single= has been added in the sandbox, to indicate whether the settlement's motto/mottoes should be displayed with the heading "Motto" or "Motto(s)". There are a number of problems with this approach:
1. It has been our experience over at {{Infobox school}} and {{Infobox UK school}} that editors do not understand the nuances of how to use |motto_single= (or in the school infoboxes' case, |motto_pl=). They put all sorts of text in that parameter, and they don't get what they intend. I strongly recommend the use of |mottoes= instead. See the Infobox school label code for how it works. Editors are much more likely to get the results they want with a more obvious parameter name.
2. If you want a plural of "motto", the word is "mottoes", as far as I know. Certainly not "motto(s)".
Just trying to avoid having a mess a few years down the road. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: this was something that Ɱ required to be added to the template before he would allow it to be used on Briarcliff Manor, New York. That is why it was added. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: also it wasn't just on the sandbox but was added to the main template. I just reverted it. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- "Mottos" is correct. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- English is hard. Sometimes it's dumb too. --Izno (talk) 00:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- Either "Mottoes" or "Mottos" is fine with me, but "Motto(s)" is not correct when a plural has been explicitly requested. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- English is hard. Sometimes it's dumb too. --Izno (talk) 00:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Jonesey95's point that we should choose the label depending on whether |nickname= or |nicknames= is supplied. However, the current situation is a mess. Parameters like |nickname= or |motto= are used on thousands of pages. Editors have already supplied comma-separated lists to these parameters. Zackmann08 has offered to run a bot over all of these pages to do an automatic conversion. However, an automated conversion is not going to be easy. It's tough to automatically distinguish between a name with a comma in it ("Mack, the Knife") from a comma-separated list (Mack, Joe, The Knife).
Take a look at the sandbox and testcases for a partial solution. I've enabled both |nickname= and |nicknames=. If |nickname= has a comma in it, I use the current ambiguous label "Nickname(s):". If it doesn't have a comma in it, we can be reasonably sure it is not a list, so I use "Nickname:". If an editor decides to use |nicknames=, I use "Nicknames:".
I've done this for all parameters that previously had "(s)" in their labels: |nicknames=, |mottoes=, |population_demonyms=, |area_codes=.
Feedback welcome before I promote to the main template. Pinging Frietjes, Ɱ —hike395 (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- hike395, I appreciate the hard work on {{detect singular}}, but I would rather do something less complicated. I would suggest that we just make
|nickname=→ Nickname: and|nicknames=→ Nicknames, and use the {{detect singular}} for generating entries in a tracking category. this would also allow us to expand the tracking for lists (e.g., {{ubl}}, {{plainlist}}, {{hlist}}, {{flatlist}}), as well as<br />. I don't think it's the end of the world if a list of nicknames is labelled as Nickname: so long as there is a path to fix it. Frietjes (talk) 14:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)- We can use both "Nickname(s)" and a tracking category, going back and fixing articles that are tracked. It's not really any more or less difficult than the current proposal. The nice thing about using "Nickname(s)" is:
- It's the current behavior, so we are making the smallest change.
- It's not incorrect.
- —hike395 (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- Point of clarification, I have offered to write a bot and file a WP:BRFA. Just want to be clear that I'm not just going to unleash a bot a my own free will. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- I just updated {{Detect singular}} to detect list templates and br, and also updated the infobox to use tracking categories, per Frietjes. Any other comments? —hike395 (talk) 06:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Deploying this brand new template ({{detect singular}}) in an infobox that is transcluded hundreds of thousands of times is not a good idea until extensive testing has been done. Like Frietjes, I think that if detect singular is used in production, it should be used only to generate a hidden tracking category, not to render the infobox.
-
- I appreciate all of the attempts at tricky parsing, because I too am a geek, but infoboxes in articles are typically edited by editors, not by programmers, and editors do not think like programmers. Just give editors two parameters to choose from:
|nickname=→ Nickname and|nicknames=→ Nicknames. They will be much more likely to do the right thing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)- I could not possibly have said this any better than Jonesey95. I agree with 100% of what you said. I'm a geek too!!! :-p Hike395 great work but not sure it is the best approach to the problem. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:47, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- I appreciate all of the attempts at tricky parsing, because I too am a geek, but infoboxes in articles are typically edited by editors, not by programmers, and editors do not think like programmers. Just give editors two parameters to choose from:
- I just updated {{Detect singular}} to detect list templates and br, and also updated the infobox to use tracking categories, per Frietjes. Any other comments? —hike395 (talk) 06:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Point of clarification, I have offered to write a bot and file a WP:BRFA. Just want to be clear that I'm not just going to unleash a bot a my own free will. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- We can use both "Nickname(s)" and a tracking category, going back and fixing articles that are tracked. It's not really any more or less difficult than the current proposal. The nice thing about using "Nickname(s)" is:
@Jonesey95, Frietjes, Zackmann08, and Ɱ: To make it clear: if we have
|nickname= produce "Nickname:", hundreds or thousands of infoboxes will look strange (i.e., have a singular label with a list of items) until we clean them up. Is that worse than using {{Detect singular}} to leave some of them in the current state of producing "Nickname(s):" ? I claim it is worse. But everyone else seems to feel otherwise.
I will defer to the opinion of the other editors and not have {{Detect singular}} produce visible markup, but I think it will make the encyclopedia worse. I'm now reluctant to make this change at all. —hike395 (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Later: I have a better idea that will not make things worse:
- For now, have
|nickname=continue to generate "Nickname(s):" - Use {{Detect singular}} find lists when
|nickname=is used via a tracking category. - Convert all appropriate articles in the tracking category to use
|nicknames=to produce "Nicknames:", using AWB because of possible false positives. - After conversion, finally have
|nickname=generate "Nickname:"
This ensures that we never display confusing labels, never use {{Detect singular}} to generate visible markup, and eventually attain "Nickname" vs. "Nicknames" consistency.
Are other editors fine with this? I will change the sandbox version and {{Detect singular}} to match this plan. —hike395 (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- That looks like it might work. In step 3, "convert all" should say "convert all appropriate", since there will be false positives. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks. Changed step 3 to make it clear that we have to use semi-automatic editing (which will take some time). —hike395 (talk) 21:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- that works for me. Frietjes (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks. Changed step 3 to make it clear that we have to use semi-automatic editing (which will take some time). —hike395 (talk) 21:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Help!
@Frietjes, Jonesey95, and Zackmann08: After about a week, the tracking categories discussed above have about 6,000 articles in them (perhaps with some duplicates). This will be about 20 hours of work with AWB. I'm slowly chipping away at it, but I'm not making much progress. It can't be fully automated, I think. Any/all help is welcome! —hike395 (talk) 19:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- I don't see a way to remove a false positive from a category, which will mean that I, or other editors, will keep looking at the same articles repeatedly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: Yes, that is true. Once we decide that a category is "finished", we can change the label from "Nickname(s)" to "Nickname", hope that editors do the right thing, and remove the tracking. Or were you worried about more than one editor performing the mass edits? In the latter case, we can just agree to divide up the categories. —hike395 (talk) 21:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Hike395: going to be honest, I'm DEEP in the throws of building {{Infobox chemical}}. Can this wait? Obviously we all know WP:NORUSH, but is there any reason you'd like to be done sooner rather than later? If you don't mind putting this on hold I'd be more than happy to dive in on it in a week or 2? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:03, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: Yes, it can wait. I probably will only be able to do a small fraction in the next 2 weeks. —hike395 (talk) 21:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Explanation needed for Category:Infobox settlement pages with bad settlement type
Can someone please explain, either here or at Category:Infobox settlement pages with bad settlement type, how pages get into that category and how to fix them? The code that applies the category is challenging to interpret. Thanks in advance. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Jonesey95, looks to me that it is triggered when the settlement type has the name of the country or one of the subdivisions in it. so, for example, Ábrego says "Municipality of Colombia" when it should say "Municipality"? probably related to forming a sensible short description without redundant words. but, someone else probably knows better. Frietjes (talk) 23:27, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Span tags changed to div tags to fix Linter errors
After a bunch of testing in the sandbox, I have changed some of this template's <span>...</span> tags to <div>...</div> tags in order to fix Linter div-span-flip errors (a div tag inside of a span tag, which is invalid HTML).
See Test case 10 for a comparison of the live template with the sandbox; the sandbox currently contains the previous version of the live template.
As far as I can tell from my testing, the infobox should look the same in all articles before and after this change. That said, WP editors are endlessly creative in their use of template parameters, and with 490,000 transclusions, there are bound to be a few unexpected side effects. Please post here if you notice anything unusual or bad happening after this change, along with a link to an affected page. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Help!
Hi can anybody spare a bit of time and have a look at the use of this template at swwiki? See here sw:Kigezo:Infobox_settlement. We tried to translate it and something now is wrong with the pushpin map, i guess. We have similar problems from time to time. We do not have anybody who really can handle template script and either try to play around and it luckily fits, or one of us asks someone at enwiki to help us.. And then you guys here at enwiki change a template that we copied ages ago and after a while we notice it does not look any more like it should... But here I guess it is just a mistake in our translation canges. Appreciate it very much if someone tries! Kipala (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm looking at sw:Mombasa and sw:Dar es Salaam and sw:Nairobi, and the pushpin maps look fine. Can you link to an article where it is not working properly?
- This may be of interest: In 2017, en.WP discontinued the use of individual latitude and longitude parameters, using the {{coord}} template instead. We had to migrate a long list of templates in order to make this happen. You can see a summary of the project at Wikipedia:Coordinates in infoboxes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Kipala, looking at enWP shows how to not do it. Look at frWP, which uses Wikidata much more. I think caWP too. enWP is not a modern model. 78.55.100.38 (talk) 03:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
IB mapframe field
Would it be possible to add a field for {{Infobox mapframe}} (just like we have one for {{coord}})? The area_km2 parameter of that template could be linked to settlement's area_total_km2 so that the OSM map would automatically use the correct zoom level.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 02:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- It is possible, but it must be done carefully. We don't want to display two maps, and there may need to be a discussion about whether a mapframe map should be implemented in an opt-in (i.e. you have to add a parameter and its value to a template transclusion in each article) or opt-out (i.e. a map will appear by default unless someone disables it). There is also the question of default zoom levels. See Infobox museum for an example of how it was done in a way that seemed to make most people happy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:06, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Inappropriate documentation part
Section Template:Infobox_settlement/doc#Redirects_and_calls is not helpful as documentation, and so beter be removed. -DePiep (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Information about redirects and calls exists since 2009 and has been deemed appropriate and helpful. 78.55.20.3 (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- 'Since 2009' does not make this section less useless. "Deemed appropriate": where was that stated? -~~
- This is an explicit support. -DePiep (talk) 08:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, it explicitly supports retaining the "Redirects and calls" section. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- You deleted stuff, which is a confirmation (although without waiting for consensus here, or even contributing here). -DePiep (talk) 15:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- BTW, what does it mean when you say: "This is not a page" in [2]? And why do you take the privilege of editing while the section is contested right here? [3] -DePiep (talk) 15:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, it explicitly supports retaining the "Redirects and calls" section. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
There is consensus to remove [4], DePiep removed it, IP did, Andy did. I renamed the section because the Calls part comes first in the text and is more important than the Redirects part. 77.13.148.190 (talk) 17:12, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Please remove the merge warning
Please remove the merge warning JUNK that is show up at the top of a mountain of community articles: "The template Infobox settlement is being considered for merging". At this exact moment, 3 identical warnings are showing up above the infobox of THOUSANDS of community articles. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 23:30, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 01:42, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 7 February 2019
| This edit request to Template:Infobox settlement has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone please noinclude the whole of the series of tfm notices? There's no need to show this message on the almost half a million articles that transclude this template every time someone proposes to merge away some obscure related infobox. The tfm message takes up valuable screen space and it also often crops up in the little snippets of an article's text that appear in the search results, crowding out the actually relevant bits of the article's text. – Uanfala (talk) 02:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC) – Uanfala (talk) 02:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Done -- /Alex/21 02:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks!!! • Sbmeirow • Talk • 05:21, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Idea: dynamically fetch the population
Hi, recently I discovered that some wrappers for this infobox template like Template:Infobox_Swiss_town or Infobox German location are using a central storage for the yearly changed population numbers, which I find quite cool. I think it would be great to add such a storage and dynamically access via some ID to this fundamental template as well. --tokes 18:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokes (talk • contribs)
Please add field to append population change
Population change over the previous period is a useful fact. Please include this field. Ythlev (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2019 (UTC)