Template talk:Infobox region symbols

Caption

This template gives preference to country name over region name for its caption. i.e., if country parameter is specified, the the caption generated is "symbols of country name" and not "symbols of region name" e.g.,{{Infobox region symbols| country = India| region = Bihar| region_type = state}} generates:

state symbols of Bihar

I think this is because it uses |title = [Symbols of] {{ifempty|{{{state|}}}|{{{county|}}}|{{{province|}}}|{{{country|}}}|{{{region}}}}}}} to generate the title. It should be {{ifempty|{{{region|}}}|{{{province|}}}|{{{state|}}}|{{{county|}}} }}···Vanischenu (mc/talk) 07:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

fixed. Frietjes (talk) 15:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks···Vanischenu (mc/talk) 06:34, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Birds, fish, insects and butterflies are animals.

Apologies if my attempt to fix the template was technically flawed.

But it really makes us look very ignorant if we list birds, fish insects and butterflies as something other than animals. If it is preferred to rename the "animals" category as 'mammals', that is fine, otherwise list all of them under animals, because an worm is no less an animal than is a tiger.

Equally, if there is a regional insect and a regional butterfly, then you have two regional insects, and to present only one appears very poorly educated. Kevin McE (talk) 09:14, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Kevin McE, not all parameters are supposed to be used at the same time. some regions have only an official animal, and that animal may not be a mammal. removing the ability to list the actual region symbols for a particular region is not the answer. however, we could make the infobox disable the generic animal option when other specific animals are listed. but the first step would be to find pages that are using both animal and bird at the same time and then correct those articles before removing functionality. Frietjes (talk) 13:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

My attention was drawn to this by the India article, where this infobox had 2 animals, and a bird. I have edited the box on that page so that there are now 3 animals. Maybe some kind of REM note to editors, that if animal is used, none of the others should be used, and that both insect and butterfly is erroneous? Kevin McE (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Kevin McE, I added tracking categories for most cases (see here). we could make these cases ignore the some of the parameters, or issue a warning message, or both. Frietjes (talk) 21:59, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Cannot use |insect= with |butterfly=

I'm seeing this {{error}} towards the bottom of the infobox on the Uttarakhand article, even after I removed the |insect=. Frietjes, can you sort this out? Thanks – wbm1058 (talk) 18:56, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

wbm1058, fixed, thank you. Frietjes (talk) 19:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols here

Hi there, I've started a proposal to merge Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols into this one. I think there's a lot of overlap, but could foresee the need to add seven to ten new fields here, likely modeled after the India-specific fields. Please register your thoughts! Thanks!-- Patrick Neil, _oѺ^∞/Talk 21:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

As per the result of the discussion, the parameters and the structure of Infobox U.S. state symbols were merged with Infobox region symbols. Take a look and maybe propose some changes or discuss the errors.    Tojoroy20 (talk) 08:09, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The current version of the template has broken the formatting of the test cases. I'm going to revert, put your changes into the sandbox (including the sandbox styles.css), and see if we can make a merged version in the sandbox that does not break the formatting. — hike395 (talk) 12:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Opposing the revert, I think there is a need to give some examples of exactly what formatting problem occurred.  

Compared with test cases, there were no problems with formatting either in Niihau or Andhra Pradesh.

But if we compare Infobox U.S state symbols with new Infobox region symbols, then we see parameters are not working if we replace {{Infobox U.S state symbols ...}} with

{{Infobox region symbol ...}} - directly,

because, The data parameters of u.s state symbols are

{{{Bird}}} {{{Butterfly}}} - in this type.

On the other hand,

The data parameters of Infobox region symbols are {{{bird}}} {{{butterfly}}} - of this type. ( also some other small variation )

That is, we can see that even though the levels ( level parameters ) are the same, the US state symbols cannot be directly compared or replaced with new - infobox region symbols/sandbox, because the data parameters are slightly different. Replacement has to be done customly from the 50 state pages.

In the case of merger, the region symbol data parameters are kept the same because changing them can affect more then thousand pages, - which I think is more if we compare replacing 50 pages customly. Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The consensus was to merge the two templates, but the proposed new template goes beyond that to make major stylistic and behavioral changes. I don't think there is consensus for that. I'm going to revert the sandbox back to implement the current template, and we can attempt a minimal merge. After the minimal merge, we can consider any major changes (which I would recommend implementing in the sandbox). — hike395 (talk) 14:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand exactly on what basis it has been reverted from sandbox too,

....goes beyond that to make major stylistic and behavioral changes!?

> This is funny, because the new merged infobox region symbols have the sub_headers extradited and everything is exactly the same - a direct merger.

...and we can attempt a minimal merge.

> The new merged version is minimal and exact merge, if we don't include the new css styles - which is not even an issue and can be changed very quickly. Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hike395 , I don't think it is appropriate to revert the infobox by yourself. I think we should give other editors a chance to look, to judge and discuss. (exactly what are the issues)

In the defence of the New Infobox region symbol, it does not affect any implemented version.

In the case of Infobox u.s state symbol direct replacement/ comparation, the data parameters can be easily implemented in this way , where the infobox u.s state symbol can be easily replaced with new infobox region symbol, ( {{Infobox U.S state symbols}} to {{Infobox region symbol}} without changing any other perametars ) - while doesn't effectiing implemented version of current Infobox region symbol.

example:- '''data10 = {{{amphibian}}}''' can be changed/ converted into '''| data10 = {{#if:{{{amphibian}}}|{{{amphibian}}}|{{{Amphibian}}}}}'''

If there are any other issues, then we can discuss and try to resolve them. Although I don't think the issues are that major, that we can not implement this new version. Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

( Although it is really hard work to merge two infoboxs and create a entirely new one , and it is really sad when the works of editors are not appreciated and the works are quickly undone as soon as the works are published. ) Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I offended you -- you may relatively new to Template/Module development on Wikipedia? When we merge two templates, we want to make sure that we don't break the merge-destination template (Infobox region symbol), and that we fully implement the merge-source template (Infobox U.S. state symbols). And by "fully implement", we need to make a drop-in replacement, so that {{Infobox U.S. state symbols}} can be replaced by {{Infobox region symbols}} by a redirect, without changing any parameters. Afterwards, we can run a semi-automated procedure to change bad parameter names, with no custom work required. Custom work on every page is error-prone--- we don't want to break any of the 50 high-traffic articles that transclude {{Infobox U.S. state symbols}}. Only when the merge-destination template works and the source-destination template can drop-in do we have a "minimal and working" merged template

There are a number of issues with the existing sandbox code.

1. If we look at the test of all of the old parameters: it doesn't work yet. A number of old parameters have disappeared and still need to work. I don't know which parameters are missing.
2. The upper-cased parameters don't work yet. Even though those are easy to change, we need to test them first to make sure that there are no problems in the merge.
3. There is no implementation of the "Living insignia" and "Inanimate insignia" headers in the sandbox. Instead, there are a number of user-specified subheaders (that don't appear to correspond to these two?) Again, this will require custom error-prone work per page, so this is not minimal and working.
4. The image captions in the sandbox generate empty divs, which cause extra spaces. These should only be produced if the captions are not empty.
5. The flag, seal, state route marker, state quarter, and list do not appear in the test case (probably due to capitalization). Again, we need to test these before we merge, not after 50+ custom edits.

Finally, there's no need to fight over the sandbox -- all history is preserved, and it's quite easy to create another sandbox (sandbox2) and modify the test cases to show the results of multiple experiments at the same time. I'll do that right now, and you can see what I was doing 12 hours ago. I wasn't finished, however -- I was hoping we could work together. If you really don't want my help, I can just wait for you to build the "minimal and working" merge.

Remember, none of us own this code: it's a shared resource we all play with and improve. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with. — hike395 (talk) 02:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, I don't disagree with these points. If you think I'm not capable, then I won't work on it, revert the changes ( experienced editors can do it better. )

But I would like to suggest some:

I think it should be left up to the editors to implement sub headers instead of making it mandatory - because I think headers depend on the region, it would be nice if the headers could be omitted or changed - if needed.

The old infobox region symbol is perfectly embedded into another infobox ( interms of css/styles and perameras ). I hope the new merged version also did justice to it.

The solution of point no. 2 and 5 , i already discussed above.

In the reply of point 1, only four (or maybe little more) perametares are disappears, which are Flag ( label) and Emblem ( label ). Both are now available in the form of Infobox image, and some other perameras like festival, mascot are now not in the new version.

In the case of U.S. state symbols, as per the discussion ,

Amphibian, Cactus, Cat, Crustacean, Dog, Domestic animal, Horse, Mushroom, Pet, Reptile, Dinosaur -

This can be used in "Animal" and "Plant" fields, with a bulletted list.

- Thank you Tojoroy20 (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm glad you have ideas for improving the template (like removing fields or adding headers). Those would be good to discuss. But if we change things now, then we won't be able to simply use a redirect: there will have to be 51 manual edits. IMO, the correct order to do this is:

1. Build a drop-in merge template that fully supports both {{Infobox region symbols}} and {{Infobox U.S. state symbols}}, as they currently exist.
2. Deploy template written in step 1. Replace Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols with a redirect to Template:Infobox region symbols. If step 1 is done correctly, this will not break any page
3. Run WP:AWB to replace the capitalized parameters with lowercase parameters. This should not affect the contents of any page.
4. Propose / discuss further changes to the merged template.
5. Implement the changes that gain consensus.

I'm pretty close to finishing Step 1. I'm happy to do Steps 2 and 3. We can then move to step 4, where we talk about all of the ideas you have for changing the template (including editing ideas from the TfD, which don't have the force of consensus, but are ideas to consider).

I'll go ahead and finish Step 1, you can see progress in the testcases. — hike395 (talk) 04:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Merge candidate

There is a candidate for the merged template at Template:Infobox region symbols/sandbox2, which should be a drop-in replacement for both {{Infobox region symbols}} and {{Infobox U.S. state symbols}}. You can judge the merge candidate by comparing the first column of the testcases (existing template) with the middle column (the merge candidate). Per the suggestion of Tojoroy20, above, I've added a test for embedding the infobox.

What do editors think? Shall we copy this to the live template? — hike395 (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

 Implemented Copying to live template now. — hike395 (talk) 13:32, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Merge finished

• Template:Infobox region symbols now implements the union of behaviors from the old Template:Infobox region symbols and Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols
• All of the parameters have been cleaned up to be in snake_case
• There are no more uses of Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols in main space
• Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols now redirects to Template:Infobox region symbols
• The contents of Template talk:Infobox U.S. state symbols has been copied to Template talk:Infobox region symbols/Archive 1
• The documentation and TemplateData of Template:Infobox region symbols now reflect the merged parameter list.

We can now discuss improving the template, if other editors would like. — hike395 (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

The contents of this template needs to be re-evaluated

The contents of this template needs to be seriously re-evaluated. This template is stealing too much precious right column space from state articles. For example, Florida doesn't need a 2nd mega-sized flag and seal, because both already exist in the top infobox. The state route marker and state quarter could be squeezed onto the same line (or removed entirely). Why is both "State symbols of Florida" and "List of state symbols" at the top of this infobox, what the heck? Also, it could be debated that "Lists of United States state symbols" at the bottom should be removed too. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:07, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

100% agreed. Personally, I find the symbols to be incredibly trivial items that generally have little to do with the subjects of their articles. I understand other editors feel differently, but if the state bird is significant, it can be mentioned in the article's "Flora and fauna" or "Ecosystem" section, at which point it wouldn't need to be in an infobox. I go particularly crazy when there is both this infobox and a standalone section with the symbols itemized (Florida, Michigan, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming, I'm looking at you). If you look at Kansas, you'll now see one of the reasons why I proposed merging Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols here last year, because this template has the ability to be integrated into the existing infobox, which would hopefully reducing some of the duplication.

Specifically about quarters, I just don't think they are significant to the states as symbols in 2023. Since the "50 states" quarters debuted in 1999, the U.S. mint has continued with a decade of the America the Beautiful series, is currently in year two of four for the American Women series, which will be followed by a series in 2026 that focuses on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Maya Angelou doesn't need her quarter included in an infobox any more than Florida. -- Patrick Neil, _oѺ^∞/Talk 14:42, 25 May 2023 (UTC)