Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes/Archive 3

I have been trying for a while to create an infobox for articles on municipal bus routes. Many infoboxes have been created for articles on the bus routes of specific agencies, but there should be one universally for all bus routes. I started created it, but I have not figured out where to go from there. On this page, I have the beginning of the text for it. If someone can complete it, that would be great. Sebwite (talk) 00:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a pointer to the discussion at Template talk:Infobox NFLactive#RfC: Use of team colors in sports infoboxes. It seems to have stalled. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The TV network infobox does not seem to work for .org websites of channels such as Free Speech TV. Could any help be given in this matter? CR85747 (talk) 23:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you were trying to get the website to show up, you used the wrong parameter. It's "web = ____" instead of "website = ____".--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 02:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I started an infobox at Rick Santelli but its width is a little overbearing in the early life of this page.

The guidelines suggest the default is 22em but reducing the parameter doesn't seem to change the width of the box.

My syntax and case seem to be correct. Where can I get additional pointers? TIA. --RayBirks (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't put a space between the number and "em". You had "box_width = 15 em" when I just looked at the code. Changing this to "box_width = 15em" fixes the problem.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo! Thx. --RayBirks (talk) 22:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi people. I need some help. I want the infobox in the Babur article to be collapsible, because it is too long. But I do not know how to do that. Please help me out. :-) Tajik (talk) 20:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coders: Please see Håkon Wium Lie's latest post in the thread at WikiEN-l. This is looking potentially wonderful. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables baaaaad, CSS gooood does not apply in all situations. Infoboxes are a table of information, screwing about with css doesn't gain anything, I'd even argue that there is something to loose.
  talk) 21:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I'd have to second that. If I'm reading the linked post and example right the move to CSS is going to:

1. Increase the basic length of the infoboxes (not necessarily a good thing),
2. Pooch any/all that are build based on the 2 column model, and
3. Royally pooch any that have added functionality based on collapsible sections.

Or am I missing something in how the CSS setup is going to work?

- J Greb (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables are intended for table data and shouln't be used for layout, since that breaks just about every non standard webbrowser (or at least makes their lives misserable). This is a well known fact nowdays. Infoboxes are primarily a layout element. Sometimes they contain a table of information and in those cases it is appropriate to use a table in the infobox. Thats the ideal anyway. Using CSS to produce tables is possibly even more evil (but that's not realy the case in the example). If new infoboxes are created with proper CSS instead of tables (where apropriate) that is a good thing I think. I doubt it's possible to automatically make such changes though, it would have to be carefully done manually, but changing a single template could affect hundreds of pages. (And the example works nicely in Firefox by the way.)
  —Apis (talk) 18:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A few thoughts then...

• If/when this is phased in, something is going to have to be done to allow for the standing 'boxes to be reworked/redesigned in the new format. As you point out changing a single template (in this case {{infobox}}) will affect tens of thousands of articles.
• While an infobox is a "layout" element, the table formatting is about the only way to generate it. Most of the design is predicated on the tools at hand - when the only tool is a table, that is going to dictate general structure.
• Is there a way to allow for collapsing sections with CSS? I've for a few 'boxes I've worked on where that is used "shorten" the 'box in cases where there are long lists that belong in the 'box. It would be nice to know if, when the future migration happens, there is a way to update them or if they are going to have to back slide.

- J Greb (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me after reading the study that this is not going to happen any time soon. IE7 does not support this approach although IE8 does. Slow adapters are going to be around for a long time. From what I gather there are still a lot of IE6 users still around. There might be a workaround for this but it might mean Wiki would have to generate two web pages, one for compliant browsers and one for non compliant. So transport costs would decrease in some cases and remain static in others but storage space would almost double. This just my first reaction and I invite comments.

It does make the use of meta-templates even more valuable as most changes would occur in the meta-template and few if any in the the client templates. --droll [chat] 23:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Hello. I've been trying to edit the Infobox for

I edited the infobox code to display "Phone number(s)" instead of "Phone numbers." It's impossible to tell if only one phone number is given with the limitations of wiki template syntax (namely the absence of string functions), so this is the best we can do. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 19:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instead exactly what is wanted ? Peet Ern (talk) 08:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC) . . . . . . . . . . . > > > >[reply]

One of the daily reports at WikiProject Check Wikipedia lists articles that include parser functions and other template elements (#Template programming element).

Frequently these are substituted templates or templates "adapted" for a specific article. Sometimes the list includes simply instances where someone used {{{cite}}} instead of {{cite}}.

I converted some of the articles to infoboxes [1][2], but there still quite a few to do. -- User:Docu —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docu (talk • contribs) 10:25, 5 April 2009

This infobox is badly needed. Apparently, very few talented Wikipedians are also anthropologists, and we anthropologists are lame at using widgets. I will be patient in awaiting your help. There is one main problem that needs to be solved by an infobox and the top (and one other action I'd like it to perform). First, it needs to contain a list of "subfields in Anthropology" that have their own Wikiarticles. Right now, the reader is forced to wade through a lot of prose even to get what anthropology is, much less find links to more specific parts of it.

Second, I'd like there to be a section (in the same infobox) that can have changing content, but is basically saying, "You are a human being, you too can participate in doing anthropology..." and then give various quick suggestions on how to use Wikipedia itself (or Google or something) else as a research tool. "Try googling "anthropology" on Google Scholar and see what anthropology is about, right now." Would be an example. Or "Take a look at this list (link) of famous anthropologists and see for yourself how broad the field is." Something that, well, invites participant-observation, as part of an introduction to a field of inquiry that is all about observation and participation.

A very simple infobox would do. I can edit existing infoboxes, just don't know how to get a nice one, preferably with a picture like this: Aztec mask 050910 170205.jpg as an illustration.

HALP! Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levalley (talk • contribs) 19:29, 5 April 2009

I can help, but let's coordinate at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthropology#Outline, Portal, and topic template. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The generic Template:Infobox character has a "First appearance" section but a lot of the specialized templates such as Template:Star Trek character or Template:Star Wars character don't have any first appearance section. This is completely illogical, considering that Star Trek and Star Wars are such huge franchises that it can be difficult to know in which book, movie or episode a character first appeared in. Other specialized templates such as Template:Buffyverse character DO have a first appearance section.

Since it doesn't make any sense, I'm assuming it's some kind of mistake made a very long time ago that was somehow left uncorrected. I believe that every character that has their own article should have a first appearance section and I intend to change all character infobox templates to include a first appearance section. Does anyone object? 203.219.42.19 (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a First appearance section to the infobox of every popular fictional character who doesn't have one is a daunting task. I can't do it on my own. Will anyone help me? 203.219.42.79 (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the template for Star Trek character but nothing happens when I try changing the infoboxes. Why isn't it working? Observatorr (talk) 06:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This editor edited only the template doc page, not the underlying code...and apparently doesn't understand that adding an infobox field involves adding more than just "First appearance=" to the code. --EEMIV (talk) 06:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we've established that I don't know much about editing Wikipedia. So is there any way I can change the template? Observatorr (talk) 06:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, I made a new infobox,

Why is it that for settlements it seems the geobox is getting more attention and use and people think it is better? Why are there geoboxes in the first place and what is the difference between geoboxes and infoboxes? I'm a bit confused about when to use which and what the difference is and why there are the two names. Hopefully someone can come up with a solution for me.Camelbinky (talk) 15:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A geobox is just a term for an infobox of an item with a fixed geographic location (building, mountain, city, country, etc). Afaik. -- Quiddity (talk) 04:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(I debated whether to discuss this here, at

If we want more whitespace around a company logo, we could simply add some CSS to the Company Infobox template, rather than edit every single company logo. Additionally, incorporating extraneous whitespace in the picture limits its use in other contexts than the Company Infobox templates. Company logos are not supposed to be "high quality" as many corporate logos (such as the Saturn logo), are not only trademarked but also copyrighted and thus we really should only have low resolution images of them on Wikipedia articles. You also weren't just adding "a small amount of margin" -- in the case of the Saturn logo, the whitespace comprised roughly 2/3 the size of the image. The image was so big that the infobox on the article's page needed to limit the image size, which causes the image to be dynamically resized when a person views the page, which would likely incorporate additional artifacts, something that you said that the new image would avoid. I think it's a great idea that you want to "set off/display" corporate logos better, but it's much easier to simply change the template than to change every image (and lowers the filesize of pages) and the focus of the article isn't on the logo in any case. Wikipedia is not a market for products, the logo is merely shown for informational/reference purposes, it shouldn't be the focus of the article and I don't think they need additional whitespace. Banaticus (talk) 06:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have started working on incorporating the idea via CSS. That said, the importance of "margin" when it comes to reproducing logos isn't exclusive to infoboxes. Logos don't tend to "illustrate" the way photographs do; a text-based logo smushed into the body of an article can be pretty awkward.

As to the Saturn logo specifically needing to be resized to fit into the infobox... As Wikipedia moves more and more to vector images, this will technically always be the case. In the case of rasterized images (the case here), in my opinion it's preferable to have images that can be scaled up if necessary without losing the integrity of the image... Having images that can be scaled makes it feasible for us to, for example, increase the sizes of infoboxes without having to reupload every logo out there.

Finally, you say: "Company logos are not supposed to be 'high quality.'" On the contrary, many companies take great exception when their logos are rendered in poor quality (hence the growing prevalence of vector logos here on Wikipedia and elsewhere, and you'll notice there hasn't been any corporate backlash).

In any event, back to what I believe is your core point, I can see reasons for having an image-based approach and a style sheet-based approach, and I'll work on the CSS shortly so that both can be considered.   user:j    (aka justen)   07:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, corporate logos are not supposed to be high quality -- there's a big text block right under the image that starts out with:

This is a logo of an organization, item, or event, and is protected by copyright and/or trademark. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images ... may qualify as fair use... (emphasis added in the original)

It is my personal belief that doubling the image then increasing it half as much again all to set if off from anything around it is also too much whitespace. The focus of a Wikipedia article should be the content, not a logo. We are not here to make a company look good or make a company happy, we're here to report on verified "truth", to put together an encylopedia. These logos are here for identification purposes only, to help a user recognize a given company, nothing more -- I don't believe they should be given additional prominence. Banaticus (talk) 07:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I need to separate out that your two points, because they seem to be merging together and they have significantly different foundations. The first is that, in my opinion, protecting the integrity a logo is a critical point of fair use. Using reasonable margins or "set[ting] it off" in the infobox does not, in any way, jeopardize our fair use of the logo, and I believe it actually advances our justification. Your points of "mak[ing] a company happy" and being here "to report on verified 'truth'" are a bit out of left field and have nothing to do with my intentions or the results, so I'm not going to try to address them.

As to "resolution" and fair use, it has long been a point of contention on Wikipedia, especially since the much more widespread use of vector logos throughout the project make the "resolution" terminology moot. "Low resolution" is an interpretation of fair use common law, that is, quite obviously, dated at this point. What matters is how we render the image, and I think that's a widely held view here on the project. The point of all of this is to say, I can't figure out whether you are or are not arguing that any of the three logos in question here have in any way violated fair use. But in my opinion, they haven't, and this seems to be a bit of a ways of from my original request for discussion of standardizing logos and company infobox sizes.   user:j    (aka justen)   07:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, we do want to protect the logo, but giving it too much prominence starts leaning towards Wikipedia:Spam, in my opinion. The logo is just for easier visual identification of the company. By the way, I looked into the Infobox templates and you don't even need to add anything to the templates to add additional padding to the image. The {{Infobox Corporate}} template is based on the {{Infobox}} template which appears to have an unreferenced parameter, imagestyle, which allows you to set additional styling for an image in an infobox. I believe if you add the line:

imagestyle = padding:3em;

to a page like the Saturn article, it'll add 3em of padding to the image. I haven't tried it yet, but I'm fairly certain that it will work. Anyway, with other ways to set the image off from whatever's around it, we shouldn't add additional whitespace to the images themselves, as it makes the files needlessly larger and extra size purely for presentational uses doesn't make much sense. Making vector or raster images, resolution, whether or not the images are even fair use, I'm willing to let that all fall by the wayside for now. To sum up, 1) I don't think the extra whitespace is necessary. 2) Even if it is, it should be added as a style to the image, not as a change in the actual image. So, whatever else ends up happening, I don't think the images should have extra whitespace around them. :) Banaticus (talk) 08:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice find with imagestyle padding. I'm still going to tinker with the CSS to try to create a standard "logo area" that has the same height and width regardless of the proportion of the logo. I don't think the infoboxes of any of the three articles I mentioned above go anywhere near

WP:ELNO policing to see my position on spam...) But a bit of standardization in the infobox company logo area was the goal here, so I'll play around with imagestyle padding and the infobox style in my userspace and see what I come up with.   user:j    (aka justen)   08:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

It would be at Category:Religion and belief infobox templates, if anyone could agree on what should be in one, or where it should be displayed (above or below the central navbox that each article probably has in that top-right location?!?). Coordinate with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion, if you're thinking of creating one. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

I have a quick question regarding headers.

In the infobox I have created, I have "sections" of information. What I would like to do is if one or more values are used, that the appropriate header would show up.

Here is the code now:

{{Infobox
| title      = {{{title|<includeonly>{{PAGENAME}}</includeonly>}}}
| labelstyle = white-space: nowrap
| image      = {{{image|}}}
| caption = {{{caption|}}}

|headerstyle  = background:#ccf;

|header1 = {{{GI|}}}
|label1  = 
|data1   = 
|label2  = Born
|data2   = {{{born|}}}
|label3  = Height
|data3   = {{{height|}}}

|header4 = {{{CC|}}}
|label4  = 
|data4   = 
|label5  = Record
|data5   = {{{college-record|}}}
|label6  = Weight-class
|data6   = {{{weight-class|}}}
|label7  = Weight-classes
|data7   = {{{weight-classes|}}}
|label8  = National Titles
|data8   = {{{nat-titles|}}}

|header9 = {{{HSC|}}}
|label9  = 
|data9   = 
|label10  = Record
|data10   = {{{hs-record|}}}
|label12  = Weight-class
|data12   = {{{hs-weight-class|}}}
|label13  = Weight-classes
|data13   = {{{hs-weight-classes|}}}
|label14  = Coach
|data14   = {{{hs-coach|}}}
|label15  = State Titles
|data15   = {{{state-titles|}}}

| below  =  {{{footnotes|}}}
}}

Basically header 9 needs to be defined when if any value in data10 through data15 are defined. Same for the other groups.

Thanks,

Calebrw (talk) 16:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: here is the implementation code.

{{Wrestler Infobox
| GI  = General Information
| CC  = Collegiate Career
| HSC = High School Career
| image              = [[File:example.png|200px]]
| caption            = John Q. Wrestler
| footnotes          = <small>Last updated: April 3, 2009</small>
| born               = August 2, 1984
| height             = 6'1"
| college-record     = 12-9
| weight-class       = 157 lbs.
| weight-classes     = 
| nat-titles         = 1:<br/>2004
| hs-record          = 149-5
| hs-weight-class    = 
| hs-weight-classes  = 130 lbs: 2000<br/>125 lbs: 1996-1999
| hs-coach           = John P. Wrestler
| state-titles       = 4:<br/>125 lbs: 1997-1999<br/>130 lbs: 2000
}}

Calebrw (talk) 16:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is just a quick guess, and I haven't tested it or anything, but you could see if using

| header9 = {{#if:{{{data10|}}}{{{data11|}}}{{{data12|}}}{{{data13|}}}{{{data14|}}}{{{data15|}}}|{{{HSC|}}}}}

for header9 would work. There may be a better way, but that looks to me like it would work.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 16:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll take a look at this in a bit. I'll let you know how it works. Calebrw (talk) 00:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After consulting #mediawiki on IRC, I came up with the following code that seems to work:

|header9 = {{#if:{{{hs-record|}}}{{{hs-weight-class|}}}{{{hs-weight-classes|}}}{{{hs-coach|}}}{{{state-titles|}}}|{{{HSC|}}}}}

Thanks to Roan Kattouw for the help. Calebrw (talk) 18:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah crap yea I see what I did haha. Using a template within a template always confuses me haha. Same basic principle, but you had to use the VALUES of data10-15 instead of data10-15 themselves. Glad to see you have it worked out!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 19:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. You got the first part done. Calebrw (talk) 22:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me with the infoboxes in some of the professional wrestler articles, like

Looks like the template was built with "img_capt" instead of "caption"... - J Greb (talk) 15:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Nightscream (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]