Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 24

Archive 20

←

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

→

Archive 30

Please add...

Please add the option so you can add a fourth established_title = y established_date, I mean, for this to work:

| established_title4 = 
| established_date4 =

Would you have an example where this would be needed? CRwikiCA talk 13:42, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, here: Tuxtla Gutierrez --Sarsvices (talk) 19:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Done! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks :) --Sarsvices (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 May 2013

The line for the population_rank field, which currently reads:

 <th> '''• Rank'''</th>

needs to be changed so that it reads

 <td> '''• Rank'''</td>

It is being formatted as a table header rather than a table cell, which makes it look different from all the other fields in the template. I have tested this in the Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox (this edit), with before and after example at User:Amakuru/Sandbox, and this seems to solve the problem. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 23:40, 31 May 2013 (UTC)  — Amakuru (talk) 23:40, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Which browser are you using? I didn't see a difference. However, it looks like most of them were using <th>...</th> for the labels, so I simply removed the extra bolding where I spotted it. I almost certainly missed some places. Did this fix the problem? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'm using Firefox v21 running on Windows 7. It looked like it was doing some kind of double bolding. Here is a screenshot:

It looks like your change has fixed it anyway, so many thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

yes, the dreaded double bolding issue, see MediaWiki talk:Common.css#Double bold effect. seems it is only a problem in newer versions of Windows. many editors won't see it, so please report it whenever you do see it. Frietjes (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

the last edit changed most of the labels from <td> to <th>. please make this change, which converts the rest of them. it also adds |pop_est_footnotes= which should resolve the problem outlined above concerning the placement of the footnote for the population and pop_est fields by adding an optional consistent place to hang the footnote. Frietjes (talk) 15:46, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Done! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit request

As GeoTLDs for cities are now being approved (e.g. .london, .nyc), could an Internet TLD field be added to the template? I have already added the field to the sandbox copy, and it renders fine. --RaviC (talk) 23:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

seems useful, since it appears there will be many of these, and it will match the country infoboxes. however, shouldn't we wait until they are rolled out? the article indicates there are currently only two active geotlds, and neither article would use this template. Frietjes (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

It seems that .nyc will be rolled out in late 2013 - so fairly soon.. --RaviC (talk) 22:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

we probably don't need a whole new parameter for a single city. for now, I would suggest using one of the generic/blank fields. once there is more than a couple, we can add a parameter. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done: There isn't a consensus for this change due to Frietjes's objection. I suggest either waiting a while until GeoTLDs become more widespread, or starting a discussion at a more-widely-read forum to try and build a consensus from a wider group of editors. (Perhaps WT:COORD or WP:VPT?) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 11:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Border for map option

It's standard practice on this wiki to put a 1px grey border on images that have a solid color at the edges that is really close to the background color. It's considered aesthetically more pleasing.

For cases when the map winds up having a lot of land at the corners, it would be good if we could have a border. Putting a border directly on the image is against the rules, so we'd need to do it in the template.

Thanks — trlkly 03:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

can you think of any case where a border around the map would be a problem? if not, we could simply add it for all images passed through |image_map=. Frietjes (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done for now: There doesn't seem to be a consensus about exactly how to implement this yet. Please reactivate the {{editprotected}} template when you have worked out how to do this. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 11:26, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

If implementing it through |image_map= would work it would be the best option in my opinion. CRwikiCA talk 15:00, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Area/Total

Can I suggest that, when only area_total_X is specified and no other area_X parameters are given (excluding perhaps area_note/area_footnote/area_rank), the area be shown next to the word "Area" instead of the redundant "• Total" item? Or alternatively, if it is important to preserve the notion of "total", replace the "Area" header with "Total area"? See, for example, Neuquén Province.

Now I think about it, perhaps this request is too hard without Lua. But I still think it should be done somehow. — This, that and the other (talk) 07:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Infobox parent template

Can this template now be re-written to use {{Infobox}}? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

try asking AussieLegend, who seems to be good at conversions of this type of infobox. Frietjes (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

there is now a version that uses {{infobox}} in template:infobox settlement/sandbox2. I will do some more testing, and if there are no problems, I will request a sync with the live template soon. there is a small bug in the infobox lua module which is currently causing some extra space in the footnotes, but this should be fixed soon. you can see comparisons in the testcases. Frietjes (talk) 23:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks great. Let me know if you need any help! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

A great step forward. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

It looks good! CRwikiCA talk 14:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Time to deploy this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

No objections; please deploy from the sandbox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. Looks very nice. Keep an eye out for any bugs, and please let me know if this needs to be tweaked or reverted. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

(ec) I was just about to ask if it was wise to deploy this after only 5 days of testing, given that the template is used in over 332,000 articles. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Mr. Stradivarius; and others who contributed. A great step forwards.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

disestablished_date

Once Now that the conversion to {{Infobox}} (see above) is done, will there be any objection to adding |disestablished_date=, as a pair to the existing |established_date=? This will facilitate future mergers for things like defunct electoral district templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:43, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

No matter; we have |extinct_date= already. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Bug in the conversion to Infobox

I have temporarily reverted the conversion to {{infobox}}. It apparently introduced a bug that prevented the second map image specified in the "image_map1" parameter to display properly, and just ended up displaying the wiki markup code for the image. Please fix. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I fixed it, there was an extra newline, I will add this to the testcases. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if this has to do with the recent conversion, but can someone take a look at Manila? The infobox stretches all the way to the left off screen, and all text became bolded. For some odd reason this only happens in the Manila article, afaik (or am I the only one that sees a problem with the infobox?) _dk (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

There was an unclosed <div> in the Manila infobox, which presumably only cause noticeable problems after the conversion. I have removed it. - htonl (talk) 09:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Strange bug resulting from latest changes

The infobox {{Infobox Israel municipality}} has a bug where non-English names are displayed in a separate nested table. An example can be seen here. This was certainly caused by the latest edits to this template. Can anyone please help fix this? Thanks, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

fixed with this change (see the testcases). Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

please update to use this version of sandbox2. this corrects several bugs: (1) the nested table problem indicated above, (2) a numbering problem which is causing established_date4 to not appear, (3) a typo causing the second DST timezone information from not appearing, and (4) uniform font-weight for footnotes. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. Again, please let me know if there are any bugs still hiding in there. (Or if you have admin rights, feel free to revert.) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 17:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 July 2013

please change

| data56 = {{#if:{{{population|}}}
  | {{formatnum:{{{population}}}}}}

to

| data56 = {{#if:{{{population|}}}
  | {{formatnum:{{{population}}}}}

which removes the spurious closing brace after the population (see this testcase) Frietjes (talk) 18:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

please change

** names, type, and transliterations **
-->{{infobox|child=yes

to

** names, type, and transliterations **
-->{{infobox|child=yes|decat=yes

which will remove transclusions of this template from Category:Articles which use infobox templates with no data rows. leave the other child=yes alone since those should not be false positives. Frietjes (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Done! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:16, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Mill Rate

I would like to add mill rate, but would like to first ask what portion of the template is most appropriate for this detail. Thoughts? Twillisjr (talk) 12:34, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by "mill rate"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Probably means mill rate? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. In that case, the term needs to be internationalised. In the UK, for instance, it would be "council tax" for residences and "business rates" for commercial premises (with possible further variances for Scotland and Northern ireland). How many articles currently include such data? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I have never seen this in the infobox, but with as many transclusions as there are, it could quite possibly be in use in one of the blank or demographics fields. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, but I meant in the body of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Microformat broken

Please revert this good-faith edit by @Plastikspork:, ASAP. per the template's documentation, elements with microformat classes must not be collapsed; if done, the microformat no longer works. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Done ~Adjwilley (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

TemplateData

A mistake in:

established_dateZZZ optional ||

 ? --Pinky sl (talk) 15:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Well spotted, fixed now. The TemplateData could do with a bit more work on the descriptions if anyone is inclined.--Salix (talk): 15:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Founder

Can this be changed to "Founded by"? In several cases settlements were established by groups of people, so "Founder" doesn't fit. "Founded by" can apply to both individuals and groups. Number 57 09:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I will boldly change this shortly. Number 57 11:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

seems sensible. Frietjes (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've made the change. Cheers, Number 57 17:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Em dashes

This template uses em dashes around the emitted text for the parameter |settlement_type=. I suggest that in line with MOS:DASH these should be changed to en dashes. In detail: please change the two occurrences of em dash (—) to en dash (–). Furthermore, I don't think two non-breaking spaces are required on either cite side of that parameter. Therefore only one &nbsp; should be used. Once consensus for this change has been reached the template {{Edit protected}} should placed here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

The usage here is a design choice, the part of the MOS you quote only refers to usage in text. What part of the MOS in particular states that this usage would have to be an en dash?
That being said, it does not mean that this design cannot be changed. In particular you propose two changes, which would do the following:

Current design	Proposed by Michael Bednarek	No dashes
Place —  Municipality  —	Place – Municipality –	Place Municipality

Which basically comes down to the question which of the two is more esthetically pleasing. CRwikiCA talk 09:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Please see the prior discussion at Template talk:Infobox orchestra#Conductors Template_talk:Infobox_orchestra#Type from which this is overspill. There is nothing in MOSDASH requiring this change. The two non-breaking spaces are required, for cases where the value entered is two or more words. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:37, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I think you mean Template_talk:Infobox_orchestra#Type? CRwikiCA talk 12:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed; thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Addressing the design choice: the version with the en dashes and single spaces surrounding the settlement type is more pleasing because it is more balanced; in the current version there is too much visual weight on the dashes. Regarding the MOS: My concern is based on one unqualified sentence: "Do not use spaced em dashes." It doesn't address the decorative use of dashes – which may be an oblique expression of its disapproval for that purpose. @Pigsonthewing: 1) I wouldn't characterise this thread as "overspill" but as "raising the matter in the appropriate venue". 2) I can't see how two non-breaking spaces on both sides of the settlement type are required if that type consists of more than one word; it would not change the display in any way – other than the obviously increased distance between the dashes and the term; if the term would become long enough to cause a line break, if that's what you're concerned about, the dash at either end would stay tied to its nearest word, regardless whether there are one or two non-breaking spaces, no? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I misunderstood your point about "two non breaking spaces" to mean "one at each end" rather than "two adjacent...". I'm ambivalent about the latter. As for your "one unqualified sentence", it sits under (and is thus qualified by) a subheading which reads "Punctuating a sentence". That section refers to "spaced dashes" in the context of "space dash space", with text both in front of and after them, as can be seen in the examples of spaced en dashes there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:03, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so there is no MOS requirement for these dashes. I searched through the archive and there does not seem to have been a prior discussion about these specific dashes. I agree there is a lot of visual weight caused by the dashes, a visual weight that is not needed because of the background. I do not see an added value in using the dashes at all and would suggest to remove them. I added a third example above for quick reference. I also made the change in the sandbox, so the testcases now list a wider range of examples. CRwikiCA talk 13:10, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree that that would be the most pleasing and functional version – less is more. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Any opposition to removing the dashes and spaces surrounding the output of settlement_type? If not, I suggest to place the template {{Edit protected}} here so it can be implemented. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:48, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

In particular it would be implementing this change. Regular contributors to this talk page seem to have been active on Wikipedia but not responded here, if there are no objections forthcoming I suggest implementing this change. CRwikiCA talk 17:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

your change introduced unbalanced bold tags. I fixed the issue by moving the bold declaration to the style statement. Frietjes (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I should have spotted that... CRwikiCA talk 18:49, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Please implement the change as discussed above by using the code from the current sandbox; diff. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:08, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

awesome. this also fixed 7th arrondissement of Paris, where the type line was spilling over onto two lines. Frietjes (talk) 16:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Missing space when area_footnotes is used.

Hello, I don't know if it has been discussed already, so sorry if I'm asking an old question. But it's been bugging me that when a value (normally a year) is assigned to area_footnotes, the result is e.g.:

Area(2006)

i.e. there is no space between the word Area and the opening parenthesis. Not the biggest problem ever, but it's quite annoying. Could it be fixed? :) 77.70.30.216 (talk) 04:46, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

It's intended for references, which is why there is no space. Try using |area_note=(as of 2006) --Redrose64 (talk) 09:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

we could add area_total_as_of parameter if this is common. Frietjes (talk) 16:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Name change?

The name of this template is Infobox settlement, but it is used for other articles as well and is also recommended in the lead of the documentation for use for country subdivisions that are not seen as settlements. Renaming this template to Infobox subdivision, or similar, would describe the infobox more accurately. The initial discussion to choose this name was based on including all uses in a catch-all name. Since this decision did not anticipate the use for different levels of government, the same arguments can be used to rename it again. The "it's not a settlement" argument is brought forward often in merging/substitution/deletion discussions about other subdivision templates. The major downside to renaming this infobox is obviously the amount of work that would go into implementing this change throughout the project. Let me know how you think about this. CRwikiCA talk 13:59, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The template has almost 50 REDIRECts (see here), Template:Infobox subdivision among them. REDIRECTs are cheap. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I, too, have seen many arguments that assume that the template is only for settlements. A rename, if we can some up with something suitably generic ("place" , "region"?) would be good, and also cheap, since we would not in fact need to change any of the existing transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:57, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that is true it will not cause a lot of problems on the front end of Wikipedia. The main question is what would be the most generic name that would be applicable on the state/province, city/town and neighbourhood/ward/district levels. Subdivision seems inclusive of everything and seems to be a term that is used around Wikipedia for this, see {{Terms for types of country subdivisions}}. Other ideas might work too, place and region seems mutually exclusive in my opinion. CRwikiCA talk 18:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I still don't see the benefit of a name change. It seems to me similar to arguing about the name of a parameter in an infobox. The template's documentation refers to its many REDIRECTs at Template:Infobox settlement#Redirects and calls; that should give users an idea about its scope. On the other hand, I suspect that a name change might cause some problems with the template's supporting templates. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:14, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The main question if you want to name things properly or you would to keep names as is, in order to not disturb anything. I think we can agree this is not the most logical name for this template. Whether or not that means the name should be changed is a different discussion, is the short term hassle worth the clarity in the long run. CRwikiCA talk 09:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Caption for image field

Chicago
Where is the caption? Here's a caption!

Is there a parameter to add a caption to the image field (that is, the one where the namespace must be added manually)? Adding one through image_caption has no effect currently.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Use image_skyline, see my edit in the box, there shouldn't be any additional formatting for this. CRwikiCA talk 17:15, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe the question is about the |image= parameter. the {{infobox}} template doesn't do much here, just appends the caption after the image, so you can get the same thing by just using 'none' and appending a caption (see second image example). we could certainly add |caption= if that's useful. Frietjes (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

That's a good workaround, but I think that a having a separate caption parameter would be better, especially for creating wrappers in cases where the previous infobox already had a field for captions.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 20:41, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

When you say "cases where the previous infobox already had a field for captions", are you implying that other infoboxes are being merged into this one with functionality being lost? That should not happen. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

If you place a caption within the image syntax, it will only be displayed if the image syntax also has |thumb| or |frame| both of which are undesirable for infobox images, mainly because of the extra borders (|frame| is also undesirable because it doesn't give control of the image size). Most infoboxes which allow images provide an associated caption parameter, which is displayed separately from the image (it's treated as another piece of text). Unfortunately, the names of these parameters vary between infoboxes; in the specific case of {{infobox settlement}}, |image_skyline= is associated with |image_caption=. {{Infobox settlement}} provides several other parameters for images (including the flags, coats-of-arms, maps, etc.) but only a few of them have an associated caption parameter. The |image= parameter has no associated parameter for a caption. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Add settlement sign image

I propose to add a parameter to add settlement signs to this infobox. By settlement signs, I mean signs on roads entering a settlement. This can be simple municipal signs or more elaborate welcome signs. There are a number of examples in Commons:Category:Settlement signs. To me, this would greatly reduce the need for fair use images in the image_seal, image_shield, and image_flag parameters. Also, in many short articles where a settlement sign in available, there's no good placement other than in the infobox.--GrapedApe (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Do you have an example of how you want this to be used? CRwikiCA talk 12:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Here's a quick example, with the images set in the "image_blank_emblem" parameter (aka "Logo"). While that's not what the parameter is for, it gives you a sense of what it could be like: User:GrapedApe/Infobox settlements test. --GrapedApe (talk) 23:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Why not just put such images in one of the existing parameters? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any that are appropriate for this kind of settlement sign--GrapedApe (talk) 23:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• I think that I may have found a way to make the image_blank_emblem parameter work. See here: Annville Township, Lebanon County, Pennsylvania--GrapedApe (talk) 03:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion: Add agricultural hardiness zone(s) parameter

I think it would be useful in an almanac sense to add parameters for the settlement's agricultural hardiness zone. For instance, in Louisville, Kentucky it would be "6b, 7a". To make it useful internationally, have a parameter for the agricultural zone nomenclature ("USDA Plant Hardiness Zone" for the U.S.). As farming/gardening are key tasks for sustenance on the planet, I think it would be worthwhile to show these values. Thoughts? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Add population gender

For India, gender wise population details are available. It will be useful to add additional fields to reflect gender wise details. --Arjunaraoc (talk) 03:32, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

certainly possible. I believe the current method is to use one of the 'demographics' sections. Frietjes (talk) 16:25, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Bug in this template?

Example using incorrect syntax

{{Infobox locomotive |name = Example using same syntax as above |image = [[File:Manouba Palais la rose 6.JPG|frameless]] }} I have corrected an incorrect but in itself understandable and good-faith error in the use of this template here. What amazed me though was the result that previous version had on the rendered page: [1]. I don't think that the incorrect parameter use should have that effect. is there a way to prevent this? Fram (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

My first thought was to suggest that Module:InfoboxImage can help here. It's used in {{Infobox locomotive}}, where it is permissible to specify images in any of three ways: |image=Example.jpg |image=File:Example.jpg or |image=[[File:Example.jpg|300px]] for exactly the same effect. However, if the form |image=[[File:Example.jpg]] is used (that is, the third form without specifying a size), it uses the image's natural size, which is akin to what happened at Manouba and is not what we desire. Perhaps if Module:InfoboxImage could be modified to detect an unspecified size, it would be useful in many infoboxes; unfortunately, it's in Lua, which has me largely stumped as to how to go about it. Perhaps WOSlinker (talk · contribs) who wrote that module, can suggest something. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

as far as I know, there is no way to extract the size of the fullsized version of the image. there is/was some discussion about making this possible, but as far as I know, this is not possible. the same thing would happen if you passed the fullsized version of the image to any infobox template. Frietjes (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

of course, you could add an 'ifexist' check around the image parameter, which would prevent using any syntax other than the documented syntax. this would also suppress non-existing images. I have no idea if any articles are legitimately using the incorrect syntax. Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

We're not looking for a way to extract the size of the fullsized version of the image: we're looking for a way to determine if any size has been given, so that if absent, a default size may be used instead of the image automatically flipping to full size. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:50, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

what happens if the native width of the image smaller than say 220px? seems that passing no size in this case would be perfectly valid (if this syntax were actually valid). however, in this case, anything but passing just the image name results in screwed up results, so the 'ifexist' is probably the least-complicated solution for detecting bad syntax. Frietjes (talk) 18:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

{{Infobox locomotive}} handles small native widths with frameless, see example. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:16, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not a bug. If you pass over the image inside square brackets, then InfoboxImage is designed to just output exactly what was input. It was designed this way for simplicity as if the image is passed over inside square brackets the module would have to do a lot of parsing work to see what settings were already included and then merge in the ones that were not. If someone wished to add that feature then they are welcome to. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Leaders

I think it would be useful in the parameters that deal with leaders if there was a field for the riding that they represent. I have fudged this in Seafoam, Nova Scotia, but it might be better if the format were dealt with consistently by the template.--Derek Andrews (talk) 22:20, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Seafoam
Unincorporated area
Government
• Councillor	Ronnie Baillie (District 4)
• MLA	Karla MacFarlane (PCANS, Pictou West)
• MP	Peter MacKay (CPC, Central Nova)

Note that not all countries have a riding/district system, so any such parameter would need to be fully optional. (Its inclusion should also depend on the locale how important the actual riding name is.) For cities with multiple ridings within city limits (e.g. Halifax), the politicians are included in a collapsible list, so it might need to be included manually. It would be easiest to include it in parenthesis (as is done for the political affiliation). It would then look like on the side when political affiliation is included as well. What would need to be determined, if there is support for inclusion, is whether the parentheses are the preferred format and whether the party or riding is listed first. CRwikiCA talk 00:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Auto Density Significant Digits

It seems that auto density is only configures to give a total of 2 sig figs. I think it should auto calculate at least up the decimal point. If settlements have population and area so exact, up to the hundredth of a decimal place, the auto field should be a little more precise. Thricecube 00:19, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Population density parameter

I'd like to request the decapitalization of the word "density" in the "population² density" parameter since it's not a proper noun there. As Redrose64 suggested elsewhere, the specific line is | label70 =  • {{{population_blank1_title|}}} Density. Brandmeister^talk 22:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. I've deactivated this, mainly because it will affect many thousands of articles, and there has been no discussion other than at Template talk:Infobox French commune#Decapitalization.

I should also mention that this template does not have a '"population² density" parameter'; what it does have is the line

| label70 =  • {{{population_blank1_title|}}} Density

and {{Infobox French commune}} feeds this template with |population_blank1_title=Population2 so that the effective display is as if the line were

| label70 = &nbsp;•&nbsp;Population<sup>2</sup> Density

i.e.  • Population² Density. But lowercasing the "D" of "Density" assumes that there is a word before that, which there might not be, see for example Birmingham. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

The issue is that in the infobox in Paris, for example, it goes as "Population² Density". I don't recall seeing this in other articles, but looks like this should be tackled somehow. Brandmeister^talk 23:05, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't see any reason why "Density" should be capitalized, regardless of what appears before it. I would support decapitalizing it. Kaldari (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Density appears on its own in most infoboxes, so capitalization is incorrect. Any change should be made to the French template, not in this main template. The problem seems to be that the superscript 2 is forced next to the population tag. Assuming that this double counting also is prevented in the urban an metro rank it can be better used in the main population tag, which would then also restore the natural order of listing the commune population before the urban and metro populations. One can argue that these footnotes should not be used in the infobox, because they deal with trivialities. An infobox is not a place to discuss details of the statistical details. CRwikiCA talk 01:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Missing a border

Cazale
Village

If an infobox has nothing in between the official name and the pushpin map, there is no border or whitespace between them, which looks broken. Kaldari (talk) 19:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. There are probably cases where we might want the pushpin map to still be a merged row, so let me know if this causes other problems. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Area rows

If area_total_ is left blank (maybe because of lack of data) then land, urban and rural area rows show up in the previous section (for example in the unrelated Government section) Windroff (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

@Windroff: Please give an example of a page where this is happening. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Here you can see a minimal example. Windroff (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It's because you've got |total_type=  - that suppresses certain rows, including the "Area" header. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The area header should always show up if there's any area row set, regardless of total_type value. There should be some added logic for when blank area_total_ is not set and total_type=&nbsp. Windroff (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Concerning |total_type=, the documentation does state 'to set a non-standard label for total area and population rows' and 'This overrides other labels for total population/area. To make the total area and population display on the same line as the words "Area" and "Population", with no "Total" or similar label, set the value of this parameter to &nbsp;.' (twice). Against |settlement_type=, the documentation states 'if urban, rural or metro figures are not present, the label is Total unless total_type is set' (again, twice). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It is not in the docs, it's only implied there. Regardless of the area data display format, it should show up in the correct section. Once the area data format is chosen, correctness of the display must not depend on data availability: if it did, simply unsetting a data row (maybe because it's outdated or not referenced) would break the template. Windroff (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

@Windroff: fixed. Frietjes (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

@Frietjes: Thank you. Windroff (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

@Frietjes: If there is no area data set, it shows an empty Area section. See here. Windroff (talk) 22:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

@Windroff: fixed. Frietjes (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

@Frietjes: Thank you. Windroff (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Typo bug in template?

See before this work around edit for no space after "Area". comp.arch (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

The lack of a space is intentional. It's because the |area_footnotes= parameter is intended to hold a <ref>...</ref> reference, and there should be no space before these. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I believe area_rank is a better field for listing the area rank. Frietjes (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

image skyline parameter

I find it confusing that the main image parameter is named 'image_skyline', since most settlements don't have a skyline. Why not just call it 'image'? Kaldari (talk) 19:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Because that could cause confusion. Besides |image_skyline=, there are five more images: |image_flag= |image_seal= |image_shield= |image_blank_emblem= |image_map= - and then there are the various maps. That said, the template does have |image=, but that doesn't have the sophisticated processing of the other means for displaying images. It takes the full image syntax, but doesn't process it in any way so doesn't work out automatic sizing or positioning. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Can any admin put "blank8_name_sec1 / blank8_name_sec2" ??

Hi, I'm currently working on the Labuan article and currently writing the history section. But when I put this information, the last section seems didn't appear on the article. I think there should be at least one more space. Thanks! — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 15:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

| blank_name_sec1     = [[History of Brunei#Conversion to Islam and .22Golden Age.22|Brunei Sultanate]]
| blank_info_sec1     = 15th century<ref name="McColl2005">{{cite book|author=R. W. McColl|title=Encyclopedia of World Geography|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=DJgnebGbAB8C&pg=PA123|date=1 January 2005|publisher=Infobase Publishing|isbn=978-0-8160-7229-3|pages=123–}}</ref>
| blank1_name_sec1    = Ceded to [[Great Britain]]
| blank1_info_sec1    = 1846
| blank2_name_sec1    = Became [[Crown Colony of Labuan|Crown Colony]]
| blank2_info_sec1    = 1848
| blank3_name_sec1    = Administered by [[British North Borneo Company|BNBC]]
| blank3_info_sec1    = 1890<ref name="Welman">{{cite book|author=Frans Welman|title=Borneo Trilogy Volume 1: Sabah|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=glG-WBH8hkQC&pg=PA162|publisher=Booksmango|isbn=978-616-245-078-5|pages=162–}}</ref>
| blank4_name_sec1    = Joined into [[The Straits Settlements]]
| blank4_info_sec1    = 30 October 1906<ref name="Haller-Trost1998">{{cite book|author=R. Haller-Trost|title=The contested maritime and territorial boundaries of Malaysia: an international law perspective|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=65VuAAAAMAAJ|year=1998|publisher=Kluwer Law International|isbn=978-90-411-9652-1}}</ref>
| blank5_name_sec1    = [[Japanese occupation of British Borneo|Japanese occupation]]
| blank5_info_sec1    = 1941–1945
| blank6_name_sec1    = Joined [[British North Borneo|North Borneo]]
| blank6_info_sec1    = 15 July 1946
| blank7_name_sec1    = Part of [[Sabah]] and [[Malaysia]]
| blank7_info_sec1    = 16 September 1963
| blank8_name_sec1    = Ceded to [[Government of Malaysia|Government]] and made into [[Federal Territory (Malaysia)|FT]]
| blank8_info_sec1    = 16 April 1984<ref name="labuan">{{cite web|url=http://www.dvs.gov.my/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=01e32808-0a2b-4369-9747-2021f14012c9&groupId=16746|title=Laws of Malaysia A585 Constitution (Amendment) (No.2) Act 1984|work=Government of Malaysia|publisher=Department of Veterinary Services|accessdate=28 April 2014}}</ref>

wouldn't this be better as part of the |established_title=/|established_date= section? Frietjes (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, but it will appears far from the timeline section. Many readers would only see and thinks Labuan is still part of Sabah just like now. — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 15:25, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

if the history is that complicated, I would consider just moving it to the history section. Frietjes (talk) 15:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I think that is now better. Thanks! :) — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 15:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Embedded template

Hello,

I'm trying to embed the Template:Nanjing districts in the settlement infobox for the city's districts, but it's not working as I hoped. The only way I could figure out to do it was to use:

| blank_name_sec1 = Districts

| blank_info_sec1 = {{Nanjing districts}}

but it makes for a really wide Infobox. Is there another option that I may be missing?

(I also posted a question related to this issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#First non-navigational template about aligning the table/template. But, if this could be added to the settlement infobox, that would solve that problem)

Thanks!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

If {{Nanjing districts}} is to be used in that manner, it will need to be modified so that it behaves differently when embedded. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok, Andy, sounds good. What type of changes are needed? Or, is there a link to a help page in Wikipedia that would help? Thanks!--14:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, someone made the fixes. Thanks anyhow.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Asturian Wikipedia

Hello, I do come from the asturian version of Wikipedia (Uiquipedia) and I'd like to have this template on our humble Wiki, but I don't know how to do it properly nor fix the mistakes that I'm not able to find, could anyone help us, please?

• Asturian version of the template
• example of how bad it fits in an asturian article

Thanks for your help, mates. Dimitri Tsafendas (talk) 16:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

I would suggest translating es:Plantilla:Ficha de entidad subnacional instead. Frietjes (talk) 17:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

As simple as it sounds, I don't know why I didn't use that at the beggining, thank you a lot. Dimitri Tsafendas (talk) 22:45, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Proposed title created as a redirect. Jenks24 (talk) 13:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

---

Template:Infobox settlement → Template:Infobox populated place – We've already named the settlement categories to "Populateed place" categories. Additionally, this name is more NPOV in some places - for example, to call Tel Aviv a settlement is to claim that Israel has no rights to it. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 10:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC) עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Support, See also the recent discussion Template talk:Infobox_settlement/Archive_24#Name_change.3F for more arguments. CRwikiCA talk 18:26, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose The name of the template isn't seen by readers, so NPOV is not an issue. If there's a problem at the Tel Aviv article, use one of the template's many redirects, such as {{Infobox City}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
• Another proposal The corresponding article is called Human settlement and Populated place is only a redirect to it. We can rename Template:Infobox settlement to Template:Infobox human settlement to avoid any confusion with Israeli settlements. Template:Infobox populated place is also ok, I don't think that the name is very important as long as it is not visible to the reader. Avpop (talk) 12:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose because 10's of thousands of articles are already using it. If any place doesn't like the name of the template, then use one of the aliases to it. This is a silly waste of time. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 18:38, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Better to leave the name as it is, and use an alias or a redirect. I do not favor the proposed "Infobox populated place" name either because not every article that uses this template is a "populated place" per se. Some are ghost towns or abandoned areas with zero population. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:56, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Just like Bill Clinton uses an {{Infobox president}}, even though he is no longer a president, there is no reason a ghost town can't use an infobox for a "populated place"; it once was one. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 03:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as waste of time. There are redirects in place, and the title is not seen by readers anyway. Maybe the title was not the best choice indeed, but it's been around for, how many, 10 years?, and is used in several hundred thousand articles, thus should be treated under some kind of grandfather clause. Don't fix if ain't broken. No such user (talk) 07:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not saying edit all these thousands of pages; we have several grandfather-clause redirects around. I'm saying rename the one template, and possibly list it at WP:AWB/TR (these redirects shouldn't be bypassed without a real edit being done to the page, anyway), so the amount of wasted time is small. And the number of pages with this tag directly on them is significantly smaller than the 425801 transclusions listed at this page - many of them actually have redirects to it, such as {{Infobox Settlement}} (15397). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• support, so long as we keep all the redirects, and we block/ban any editor seen pointlessly replacing the redirects. Frietjes (talk) 13:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Template-protected edit request on 2 July 2014

I want to add a police and fire department badge organized like the flag thing. Thelogoontherun (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Why? The article is about the town, not about the Fire and Police departments, so why should their badge get such a prominent place? Just including them in the article itself would suffice I would think. CRwikiCA talk 18:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I thought we wanted to move away from the flag thing. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 18:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Precision in auto density calculations

Why isn't the precision should be set to $\min({\text{sigfigs of area}},{\text{sigfigs of population}})$? TLA 3x ♭ → ♮ 02:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Location of pop_est_footnotes

The location of the output of "pop_est_footnotes" field seems to always be on a new line following the estimate line, BUT if I put anything in the "population_note" field then it works. It appears that "population_note" pushes all field text to the right a little bit. Please investigate discuss this weirdness. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 10:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Do you have an example? CRwikiCA talk 13:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hmmmm, I tried it again, now I don't see it. I'm 100% sure that I saw it before I left this post. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 15:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Did you use the same browser in both cases? CRwikiCA talk 16:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, IE11 on the same computer running Windows 7 64-bit. I just now check it with Chrome 36 on the same computer, and it looks fine. Maybe I saw it when I clicked the "Show Preview" button, but I tried it again in the last hour and don't see the issue there either. Maybe someone was messing with a lower-level template that caused this issue? If I see it again, I'll respond. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)