Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Standardisation on {{Infobox settlement}}

Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Standardisation on Infobox settlement for wider discussion about this template. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 02:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

That discussion has since been archived here. - Ruodyssey (talk) 03:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

165K transclusions

The template transclusion counter found 165033 transclusions of this infobox, just now! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:50, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

And just now; 165239 - an impressive growth rate. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Now 198651. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Fix needed

{{editprotected}} Please decap "Iso_code". Apologies if that was my error. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. — RockMFR 00:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you; that's working, now. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Examples in documentation

Based on some of the recent TfD concerns about whether this template is appropriate for "higher-level" administrative divisions (counties, provinces, etc.), I wonder if it might help to add some specific examples in the documentation. For an example of what it might look like, check out Template:Infobox_Place_Ireland/doc. The main documentation page for this template is already rather long, so perhaps it would need to go on a sub-page, but still it would be nice to have examples of several different uses so that it isn't quite so abstract. Some people just don't "get it" until they see a specific case, and while we can always point them to articles that use the template, having it in documentation helps provide a stable, clean place to direct them. --RL0919 (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Now there's a redundant template, ripe for deletion… ;-) Seriously; yes, I'd be happy to help with that, maybe in a day or two. In the short term, we could compile a list of articles of different types, using this template. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

If a merger is ultimately performed, would it be possible to use specific redirects for templates currently in use, along the lines of the generic redirects being created now? I guess when you get right down to it, that is my chief concern (other than my past comments on the process). I supported the standardization at {{Infobox Officeholder}}, and could support it here if we keep region-specific templates as redirects. Admittedly, many region templates aren't even used right now, but that doesn't mean they won't be in the future. Some were created that probably shouldn't have been. I for one would never consider creating {{Infobox U.S. township}} since Settlement already did what I needed. Anyone would be free to use {{Infobox Settlement}} or the appropriate regional name, and the redirect would keep everyting behind the scenes. That also means articles using the old name wouldn't need to be updated to retain functionality unless an editor chooses.

For example, {{Infobox Officeholder}} maintains the functionality of all prior infoboxes and fields. The bulk of the code is behind the scenes even further to cut down on bulk. Region specific fields are also added as needed, such as Taoiseach, the Irish-language term for Prime Minister. There's {{Infobox Senator}} for U.S. Senators, {{Infobox MP}} for Ministers of Parliament, {{Infobox State Senator}}, {{Infobox US Ambassador}}, {{Infobox Indian politician}}, {{Infobox Eritrea Cabinet official}}, and so on. This system has worked very nicely with very few grumblings or objections from editors. s that something we could replicate here? The documentation also gives good examples of how a blank template for each one looks, only showing the fields relevant to that particular office.DCmacnut<> 20:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the main issue would be whether the templates being merged already had a field structure similar to {{Infobox settlement}}. If they do, then a simple redirect might work. If not, then I believe they would have to be converted first, then redirected, which might be more trouble than it is worth to do for every localized variant. A partial compromise might be something like this: If a particular administrative division is called a 'province' (for example) then replace the local template ("Infobox countryname province" or whatever) with {{Infobox province}} instead of {{Infobox settlement}}. This would avoid confusion over the word 'settlement'. We could also potentially provide streamlined code examples similar to those for {{Infobox officeholder}}, only showing the fields that would be used for a province, district, etc. --RL0919 (talk) 20:42, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

blank_info

Any idea why {{{blank_info}}} is showing in thw last-but-two section of the Infobox on Keelung? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:37, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

blank_info_sec1 is unspecified. That code is horrific right now, admittedly. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:51, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, this fixed it, but you'd expect that not to mater. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Population

There needs to be a simple "population" field. Not total or estimated - just population. Therefore I am adding it. Rich Farmbrough, 15:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC).

coordinates_display

Right now the coordinates are passed to {{Geobox coor}}, which allows for display either inline or inline,title, but no option for only title. Would it be possible to allow only display in the title if "coordinates_display" is set to something? If so, what should that keyword be? title, onlytitle, titleonly, title only, no inline, noinline, ...? I am happy to make the change if people are agreeable. Currently, any value in coordinates_display is treated as 'inline,title'. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:48, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the point to personalize this even more. I think that 'inline,title' should be the default, or even get rid of "coordinates_display" and always show the coords as 'inline,title'. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 19:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The point is that the current usage is somewhat misleading, and pointless. If you set coordinates_display to anything, then it gives you "inline,title". If you set it to nothing, then it gives you inline. There is no way to use the pushpin map without setting the coordinates, which makes it impossible to use the pushpin map, without having the coordinates appear. Not everyone is of the opinion that the coordinates should always appear in the infobox. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:CountryAbbr and excessive transclusion

{{CountryAbbr}}, which is transcluded with this template, transcludes 570 other templates. This causes almost all the pages that transclude this template to parse slowly, makes editting and preview slow, and makes the list of transcluded templates under the edit box almost useless. It already inserts 73,292,880 unnecessary and useless rows in the template links table in the database, and once used in all the infobox calls, that number will rise to well over a hundred million.

The template is used to figure out the country and region codes, but it does it in a very complicated way from quite unreliable input. This information should instead be entered as parameters into the template calls on each of the 170,000+ articles, preferably by a bot that would subst the CountryAbbr template. Zocky | picture popups 12:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I do a lot of flag template work, and WhatLinksHere is essentially unusable for flag templates that are transcluded from here or from {{CountryAbbr2}} etc. I fully agree that CountryAbbr is unreliable, as the input for the subdivision_name and subdivision_name1 parameters is quite variable—sometimes the names are wikilinked, sometimes not, and there are many variations of flag renderings. I think it is poor coding style (speaking as a software engineer) to parse parameter A—which has no syntax restrictions—to figure out a value for parameter B, instead of just specifying parameter B directly. Therefore, instead of substing this template, I would strongly support a bot that went through all transclusions of this template to specifically add coordinates_type = type:city_region:XX-YY, and then remove these "Abbr" templates altogether. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

It would be even better if they had |country_code=XX|region_code=YY. that way the values could be used for other useful things, like deciding which {{location map}} to use. Zocky | picture popups 19:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I had thought about those ideas a few minutes after I hit "Save page". ;) It could also be used for instances where {{Infobox settlement}} is used for second-level administrative divisions, and we already have the iso_code parameter for that, so perhaps we could make use of that existing parameter for cities etc. as well. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I just noticed that the London geocoordinates don't have a region code because {{CountryAbbr}} didn't recogize the subdivision_name. Would someone care to take this to Wikipedia:Bot requests? --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

24-March-10: Looks like the massive problem has been inside {CountryAbbr2}, with the overuse of name/flag templates to decode a nation's title from the 3-letter code, where, perhaps, some people thought the effect would be to just match the current nation code against the caller's country name; but instead, {CountryAbbr} seems to copy all the subtemplate links (perhaps 500-560 subtemplates) into each and every article using this {CountryAbbr} template. Since the nation names don't change very often, the 340 could be hard-coded into {CountryAbbr2}, rather than decode ~560 name/flag templates within every city/nation article page. If a nation changed it's name, then the associated users would notice the old name and see the need to update the {CountryAbbr2} template. I have created the "{{CountryAbbr2/sandbox}}" version to streamline the {CountryAbbr} template, and reduce Infobox_Settlement by 500-560 transcluded subtemplates (for cities using {CountryAbbr} with subdivision_name); however, the simplest approach might be to have Infobox_Settlement use a {CountryAbbrFast} which avoids the convoluted lookup of the peculiarism of flag images with text. There are over 75,000 article pages still using {CountryAbbr2}. See Template_talk:CountryAbbr2 for status of the update. -Wikid77 (talk) 22:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Much of this is due to the areadisp sub template. Will be sorted imminently. Rich Farmbrough, 05:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC).

SQ Miles

How do I get sq miles to show up first for the area and have sq km in parenthesis? CTJF83 chat 17:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Use "unit_pref = Imperial". Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, CTJF83 chat 03:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Use to illustrate non-settlement articles?

A user has recently been adding lots of {{infobox settlement}}s to the article Jewish philosophy, to illustrate where each of the philosophers discussed in the article came from.

The result is not unattractive, but I suspect there may be lots of hidden things coded into this template that classify the page using it as a city, etc.

Is there a variant, that would be safe to use on non-settlement articles, which would still produce the pushpin map and titling, but without any hidden side effects? Jheald (talk) 19:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

{{Location map}} is the template used to display the pushpin map without all of the unecessary overhead used by this template. Personally, I find the slew of pushpin maps on the article in question to be cumbersome and distracting, and the pushpin style map is not always "correct". The Kingdom of Aragon is not well illustrated with a pushpin style map, for example. Wouldn't it be better to just remove the maps and let people curious about these locations navigate to them via wikilinks? Shereth 20:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful comments. In defense of using {{infobox settlement}}s I want to point out that the maps, as they presently illustrate contemporary locations of historic Jewish Communities, contain links to the appropriate wiki pages that allow users to find and browse, for instance, the Kingdom of Aragon historic maps, history, polity and events; in the same breath I want to also point out that this is meant to illustrate to the reader the constant ebb-and-flow of boudaries which define Kingdoms, Caliphates, and Archbishoprics in medieval Iberian Peninsula from 800 CE until Alhambra Decree. A clear example of this is in Candia, Republic of Venice, which is today known as Heraklion, Crete - a user might not otherwise know that the protections granted Jews by Republic of Venice extended to this presetn-day Greek Island - thus explaining how a Rabbi found this remote outpost so attractive. I hope this appropriately explains my use of {{infobox settlement}}s on Jewish Philosophy and persuades you to allow its use in this context. Jimharlow99 (talk) 23:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

For what it is worth, we neither allow nor disallow the use of this template on pages - it is up to the individual editors of the page in question (in this case, you among others) who determine what templates are appropriate for use on the page. There are a very few exceptions for certain administrative templates, but overall nobody owns a template and nobody decides where it may or may not appear. I was just giving some advice/an opinion. Cheers, Shereth 14:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

That said, the usual thing is to use Infobox templates only in articles that the infobox is about. This among other things helps with machine extraction of data. Using {{location map}} seems more appropriate in this instance. Zocky | picture popups 01:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the input - I'll get started re-tooling the maps to use the {{location map}} template - you are correct in that it seems more appropriate in this instance given the fact that I can put more than a single settlement on a map AND place the map within the page at my own discretion. I should be finished changing out the template on Monday afternoon.Jimharlow99 (talk) 21:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Fix UTC offset

{{editprotected}}

Currently, if the UTC offsets are not specified then this template produces unusual output. This prevents {{tz}} from being used to denote the time zone. Fix for this is to replace the following code:

<td>{{{timezone1|{{{timezone}}}}}} ([[UTC{{{utc_offset1|{{{utc_offset}}}}}}]])</td>{{#if:{{{timezone2|}}}|</tr>
<tr class="mergedrow">
<th> </th>
<td>{{{timezone2}}} ([[UTC{{{utc_offset2}}}]])</td>}}

with:

<td>{{{timezone1|{{{timezone}}}}}} {{#if:{{{utc_offset1|{{{utc_offset|}}} }}}|([[UTC{{{utc_offset1|{{{utc_offset}}}}}}]])}}</td>{{#if:{{{timezone2|}}}|</tr>
<tr class="mergedrow">
<th> </th>
<td>{{{timezone2}}} {{#if:{{{utc_offset2|{{{utc_offset2|}}} }}}|([[UTC{{{utc_offset2|{{{utc_offset2}}}}}}]])}}</td>}}

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

• Done. Shereth 14:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Pushpin map label

This label is not customizable and takes the form of the infobox name. Can a "pushpin_label" field be added to overwrite the default label? I am thinking of some instances were the default is very long and it would be advantageous to have a customizable label. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 21:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

InterWiki to hr:wiki

There is no wiki link to article in Croatian Wikipedia:hr:Predložak:Infookvir naselje. Please can it be added?

--Gdje je nestala duša svijeta (talk) 11:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

There appears to be a link now. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Intricate syntax

This template needs some decent documentation. What should be put in what fields, and so on. What is acceptable, what are alternatives, which are synonyms, and so on. I just fixed an image_seal that did not work and it worked for image_shield. This is bloody ridiculous. I keep getting told to use this template because it works, but it does not work, because one has to be a mind reader to understand what it might, d.v. on a good day with the wind blowing in the right direction, actually produce from perfectly sensible input into entirely nonsense output. Where are the test cases? Where is the doc? And it is locked so I can't even make good of it the nonsense that is in it.

You would probably presume that I am a little bit more than slightly annoyed at this template. You would guess right. If {{Infobox military person}} can get it right, if {{Infobox writer}} after discussion and consensus add a field, if {{Infobox writer}} does the same, why can't you change this TO WORK? I have had numerous discussions in numerous talk pages about why this does not work, THIS TEMPLATE DOES NOT WORK, because it is too complicated, it requires specifications of images which it doesn't say how it wants them (with or without File: etc.), what fields it computes, which takes precedence, all kinds of nonsense. SORT IT OUT PLEASE.

You can halve the fields and keep the same function and not even have to run a bot over it. It is aged, and it has got to senility. I am an inclusionist and a progressive editor, but this boat leaks at the seams now. It needs to be fixed (US: It needs fixed).

My frustration here I shall probably regret tomorrow, but it is how I feel and I cannot be the only one. I just want to edit articles, not have to jump through flaming tyres to get this template to work.

Si Trew (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

There's a considerable amount of documentation at Template:Infobox settlement/doc, and while I can see as how it isn't user-friendly, it also isn't locked. Try editing it.

While I'm hardly an expert on this Infobox, I'd be happy to help improve its documentation. However, to revamp and simplify the template itself would be a massive undertaking, given how complex it is, the huge number of times it is used, and the diverse ways in which it is used. At the least, we'd need a large number of testcases and a cooperative admin.

If there are specific features that you're having difficulty using, perhaps the first step would be to list a few examples so the rest of us can know exactly what you're talking about.--Stepheng3 (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

My frustration was not really with the template, but with the documentation, which means one has little idea what actually is, or is not, acceptable input. For example, one does not realise that some fields need straight numbers as they use {{convert}} or similar to add formatting and other nice tricks, whereas others, seemingly parallel in purpose, do not. I have calmed down a bit, I assure you! But really for such a widely-used template, the doc needs improving.

I can certainly have a go at this but I imagine it would be immediately reverted. And sandboxing is not really an option because then one just moves the battle one step farther away, and ends up re-enacting it on the original battlefield centuries later. It's a useful template let down by its documentation. I would really like to improve the doc, and I may have a go at it, one day, but I bet it will be reverted. I will try to do it little-by-little, as is my way, but that may go against my belief in every edit standing on its own feet.

Thanks for your considered response to my rant. It's nice once in a while to just let oneself go.

I've not been around too much later but that is for other reasons, certainly not because of this template. Si Trew (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, there's no sandbox for documentation, so go ahead and edit it directly. I for one would support documenting which fields require pure numeric data. I'll try to find some time to help with this. If our changes do get reverted, it's not the end of the world, just the first step in the BRD process. --Stepheng3 (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Template breaks page formatting

I noticed when viewing Vienna that this template (and yes, I edited and previewed *many* changes and finally determined definitively that this template is the cause) that this template causes the page to be slightly wider than it should be, adding a horizontal scroll bar. Someone knowledgeable in the way of templates wanna fix? 72.201.244.71 (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe I fixed the problem. Basically, the pushpin label was placed to the right of the pushpin, which caused it overflow off the pushpin map. If you see this sort of thing in the future, you can fix it by adding "pushpin_label_position = left" to the infobox. Let me know if you see any other problems. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Automatic density computation

See here, but basically the question is if there are any objections to making "density=auto" do nothing if either pop or area is missing. As it stands right now, it issues an error message. In my opinion, auto should include simply not computing it if it's not possible given that there is missing data. If there are no objections, I would be happy to make the change. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of any reason not to make the change. Shereth 17:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. That would be a nice improvement. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I created a subfunction, {{infobox settlement/checkauto}}, which appears to allow for the desired behavior. Please let me know if this causes any problems. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cannot recognize commas in some areas

The template appears to not recognize commas in certain sections, such as the area of a settlement in square kilometers or square miles. I do not know how many parameters are affected because those are the only ones I have tried besides the total population. However, it does recognize commas in at least one other section, total population. Fortunately, it does display numbers with commas in the infobox. I suggest that the template be modified to accept numbers with commas to make editing easier. When numbers get large, and they can be quite large for some cities, it is easier to read them when commas are used. Also, the last time I checked, the Wikipedia Manual of Style instructed that commas are to be used in numbers when appropriate. I do not know if things have changed since then, though. This template is complicated and is used in a large number of articles, so I do not want to make changes myself (once a consensus is formed). -- Kjkolb (talk) 06:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The situation appears to be that any field which is used in a mathematical expression must be an unformatted number. Hence, even the population can cause problems if it is used in a density computation. The difficulty that arises is that some parts of the world swap the meaning of the comma and the period in a number's format. Wikipedia does have a parser function which will unformat and reformat numbers, which can allow for formated numbers to be unformatted before an calculations. I can see an advantage to this. See the mediawiki link at {{formatnum}} for details. If there is consensus to make such a change, I would be happy to help out, but I won't have much time until this weekend. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Directly related to the point I raise above. Some fields essentially take text (which might happen to be numeric), others like numbers. At a first stage, we should document which is which. In the English Wikipedia it is probably safe to assume Unicode FULL STOP is the decimal separator and Unicode COMMA is the thousands separator. Si Trew (talk) 23:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Alright, so are there any objections to adding {{formatnum: |R}} to allow for commas in the numeric fields? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

This feature has now been added to the various conversion subtemplates. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)