Template talk:S-hou

For instructions on how to use this template series, see Template:S-start/Instructions. See also Template_talk:s-start

Categories born and died

These seem redundant, almost every article has them explicitly. They also break things if the dates are put in wikilinks. I've removed them. Rich Farmbrough 18:46 3 May 2006 (UTC).

The death entry also breaks if applied to a living person. Septentrionalis 03:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Colour

Changed color to Corn (color) after several attempts. I think the existing color clashed with {{s-pre}}; and this should be pastel enough to go with the rest of the series. Septentrionalis 17:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current colour is, to my mind, not very appealing. It's far to bright. Srnec 04:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative changes

adds name
reformat to have born and died on same line, but
when, where, how, {5} works or should work with that goal suspends effort, but for #1 (name).

needs researched on parm {5} use // FrankB 17:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{| style="background: #FFD700;"
|
|
|
|-
! colspan="3" style="background: #FFD700;" |<!--
 -->{{#if:{{{name|}}}|<!--
 -->''{{{name}}}''<br><!--
 -->}}<!--
 -->{{#if:{{{1|}}}<!--
 -->|'''{{{1}}}'''<small><br/>}}<!--
 -->{{#if:{{{6|}}}|'''Cadet Branch of the {{{6}}}'''<br/>}}<!--
 -->{{#if:{{{2|}}}|<!--
 -->
|- bgcolor="#FFD700"
|Born: <!--
 === -->{{ #switch: {{{2}}} <!--
 === -->| Unknown=Unknown | unknown=unknown | [[{{{2}}}]] <!--
 === -->}}<!--
 === -->}}<!--
 === -->{{#switch:{{{3}}} | Unknown=Unknown | unknown=unknown | [[{{{3}}}]] <!--
 === -->}}
|<!-- Center cell... leave blank?
 -->
|<!-- Note: Still inside if(2); Begins right hand cell (Died)
 -->{{#if:{{{5|<noinclude>-</noinclude>}}}|Died: <!--
 -->{{#if:{{{4|}}}<!--
 -->|{{#switch:{{{4}}} <!--
 -->| Unknown=Unknown | unknown=unknown | [[{{{4}}}]] }} <!--
 -->}} <!--
 -->{{#switch:{{{5}}} | Unknown=Unknown | unknown=unknown | [[{{{5}}}]]<!--
 -->}} <br></small<!-- End-switch{5}
 -->}}<!-- [Endif: {2} ]
 --><noinclude>
[[Category:Succession templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]
</noinclude>
|}

suspending now for input // FrankB 17:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the flaws that can occur due to the inconsistencies between page title and the person's name, I believe that this is a nice overhaul of the s-hou template. I never was completely satisfied with it when I created it. For one thing, I always wanted to put the person's name at the top of the chart, but I wasn't sure if it would work. Now seeing it, I believe it does. I also was never able to get the switches and the #ifs to work properly so I abandoned the effort. Now it seems you have done such a good job that Template:s-hno, the dateless version of this, is completely useless and can be phased out. Good job and keep up the good work! Finally, please if you haven't already done so, join Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. It is the project that is trying to support these types of changes!
–Whale y land ( Talk • Contributions ) 07:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why I'm reverting these changes

I'm sorry, but this change hugely uglifies tiny succession boxes. Look at Henry II of Navarre for an example. Half the height of his box is taken up by this template. And the changes in bolding and such are also worse than the previous version. I'm sorry, but I feel strongly that it should be changed back, and for this reason am reverting it to the version from 10 May 2007.

Also Louis88 and KuatofDY, you two make up the past 68 edits to this template and appear to edit it multiple times in the same minute. This is a hugely reckless waste of the WMF's resources, as this template is transcluded to over 1500 pages. Atropos 01:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and in your changes you somehow screwed up the Birth thing so that it only says Birth: if you have a date with it, rather than just a year. Atropos 18:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before you revert this template back again, I'd like to forward you to WT:SBS where we should discuss any further changes. However, currently certain features of this template (the changes since the revert you sent us back to) are hard wired into other succession boxes in such a way that we can't just do a simple revert. I will make the name normal sized again, but it was agreed upon to have that option at the top of the succession box, and we will keep it. Regarding the birth problem, which I am aware of, I will notify FrankB, who created the current style, that the template is not currently working as it stands due to that problem, and ask him to fix it. However, reverting this template back screws up over 250 templates that currently do not have birth or death dates listed, thus producing even uglier templates than you describe. The problem has been continuous for a few months now, so I don't think people will mind it being a problem for a little longer. Let me talk with FrankB and see if he can get that fixed.
–Whale y land ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry about all the edits. I should have used a test template when I was doing all those edits but I neglected to. I have since changed my ways.

Alright, I think I fixed all the problems with a little testing this time. Hope all works correctly!
–Whale y land ( Talk • Contributions ) 22:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Template:s-hou

(Xpost cc from my talk here)

Apparently there is a major problem with your edits to Template:s-hou that require your immediate attention. in the common event of someone types a birth year but no birth month (thus a 3 but no 2 in the parameter listing), the birth title disappears and the date appears beside the royal house name as such:

(Note... Template used, so solved problem no longer manifests in below!)

S-hou House of Romanov Born: 1910 Died: 1918

We need to fix this problem post haste before an admin comes and reverts everything, screwing up the entire WP:SBS and throwing us back about three months. Please do something as soon as possible.
–Whale y land ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reply, belated) So sorry to be MIA... but I've got those ole summertime wiki-blues. The succession of changes and the talk discourse looks to be on track...

(removed the big heading, some worthless quote marks, and maybe a fix to the born problem) requested changes begin
(cleaned up template a little and demoted from a header to a standard table) Seems a fine resolution

Also have to agree that a template such as this one on so many pages need be changed carefully and only minimally, so do continue development on such in a sandbox unless your change is bullet-proof in NOT affecting things already in place.

Since you all seem to have handled all this fine, I'll just go back to sleep! <g> Cheers! // FrankB 20:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Xpost cc from my talk)

Please revert undiscussed change

{{editprotected}} Please revert colour removal change for which consensus was neither sought or reached at the project's talk page. Bazj (talk) 11:52, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this reversal has now been done. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 23:53, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move colour to top border as per WT:SBS discussion

{{editprotected}} Please move colour to top border as per WT:SBS discussion. Change

background:

to

border-top: 5px solid

Thanks. Bazj (talk) 14:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This one is done, --Diannaa ^(Talk) 03:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Royal House

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The 'Royal House' pages has now been merged with Dynasty, as such I suggest that the link on the template be updated to fix the redirect. Sotakeit (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit template-protected}} is usually not required for edits to the documentation, categories, or interlanguage links of templates using a documentation subpage. Use the 'edit' link at the top of the green "Template documentation" box to edit the documentation subpage. ----Redrose64 (talk) 15:41, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 20 July 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

It has come to my attention that this template in its current state is somewhat broken. If used at the top of a list of succession boxes, it appears that its width overrules that of the successive boxes. The subsequent squeezing causes some hard-to-look-at wrapping issues.

Example in sandbox and some other examples:

Could someone please have a look at this? Thank you. --Jay D. Easy (talk) 14:40, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{S-hou}} has no width of its own. It takes its width from the overall width of the succession boxes together - see Henry VIII of England#External links which is narrower than the examples you gave. Your examples appear to be wider because they shared each of their positions (as did their predecessors and successors) with numerous others who also had long names. Which boxes appear hard-to-look-at? Cabayi (talk) 15:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick response! I have to admit that your explanation makes little sense to me, because if {{s-hou}} takes its width from the overall width of all succession boxes on a page, shouldn't that mean that it should be more flexible? The term hard-to-look-at might not have been the best way to describe it, but wouldn't you agree that the bottom example in the sandbox looks better than the one above it, simply because it makes optimal use of the page's width, thus allowing for a better overview? --Jay D. Easy (talk) 15:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jay D. Easy, you may not get my explanation, but your sandbox version shows you get the principle.

No, I don't agree the second version is better. Consistency between the succession boxes is one of their key virtues.

On the other hand I've always thought that s-hou was more of an adornment sitting on top of the succession boxes rather than a functional aid to navigation like the other succession box components.

In either case, your suggested change comes down to an aesthetic judgement call, so...

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template.

The best place to gather consensus would be at WT:SBS. Cabayi (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi, thank you for taking the time to discuss these potential changes and thank you for the link to WT:SBS. It's exactly what I was looking for. I'll spend some time reading through it, because I feel like I might not be the first to make this type of suggestion. Also, I'll try to take consensus into account next time. I'm aware of the concept, but did not stop to think that the type of change I'm suggesting is exactly the type that others might have valuable input for. Thanks. --Jay D. Easy (talk) 16:31, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed edit: bolding the page name.

Looking at a real-life example of this template in use: Charles VIII of France, I find that the title of the page (Charles VIII of France) gets lost amongst the links. It would appear to me that bolding the title would strengthen it and visually reinforce its position as the title of the entire box structure.

I'd like to propose the following edit:

from:

-->|{{PAGENAME}} }} }}}</div><!--

to:

-->|'''{{PAGENAME}}''' }} }}}</div><!--

It would appear to me a simple, straightforward and uncontroversial edit, with little potential for unexpected side effects. 2001:558:6017:107:253E:85F6:C00:670 (talk) 01:52, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The visual effect is even more apparent on Louis XII where the second line, "House of Valois, Orléans branch" totally overpowers the first line "Louis XII". The proposed bolding would really help balance the page. 2001:558:6017:107:253E:85F6:C00:670 (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]