User talk:Fabartus/Archive08

[ EDIT ]

Welcome!If you followed this signature (FrankB), you've found my wiki-home!

My accounts (Talk Page links) on other Wikimedia Foundation Sister Projects:
Meta	Mediawiki	Wikibooks	Commons	Wiktionary	Wikiquote
Wikisource	Wikinews	Wikipedia	Wikispecies	Wikiversity

09:03 UTC Monday 2 December	[edit list] Talk page archives: /Archive01— to 08 July 2005 /Archive02— to 19:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC) /Archive03— to 19:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC) /Archive04— to 23:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC) /Archive05— to 15:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC) /Archive06— to 18:46, 03 February 2007 (UTC) /Archive07— to 20:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC) /Archive08— to 08:43, 07 August 2007 (UTC) /Archive09— to 00:14, 09 November 2007 (UTC) /Archive09— to infinity and beyond! }} ...that's all folks!

C and F welcome

I'm sorry, I entered the wrong username when I was trying to log in. On most sites my username is Cheat and I forgot the "C-". I apologize for sending a password request e-mail to your e-mail address. -C-Cheat 04:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok- I got the email, and flagged it to Brion Vibber. All is OK // FrankB 16:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Re You're the expert

re: User talk:David Kernow#You're the expert

Hi Frank,

re: Country_subdivisions Vs. Administrative division...

Should these be merged? Look like less than a gnats eyelash of distance between the meaning of the definitions.

I'm not sure; my understanding is that administrative divisions are one type of country subdivision, but not the only type...

Go ahead and rename it but CFR/TFR and attempt to adjust to the commons???. I was wrestling with the difference in category names on the commons (subnational entities or divisions) versus our 'country subdivisions'. I think the problem with 'divisions' and Americans in general is Americans aren't used to thinking of the US Gov't first so we build up, not divide down... I think this is a good point, so (with deep breath) I wonder if there's a third expression that's acceptable and can supercede "subnational entity" and "country subdivision". My second thought was "subnational unit" (i.e. a variation on "subnational entity") but I'm not convinced whether people would think of states, parishes, etc when they read/hear it; like "subnational entity", it may be too vague and/or abstract...

Meanwhile, ... while other countries' articles and templates use "administrative division/s", the description "political division/s" seems to be used in many/most/all US articles and templates...

per the above! and conjecture it's more who started what trend in 'term usage' inside what set of templates, than any significant difference in meaning...

In which case, if/when I ever reach those articles/templates, I could try renaming one or two in line with other articles/templates and see what if any reaction there might be.

Let sleeping dogs lie, I'd suggest--but 'ORing' the terms so as to equate them has a small degree of uniformity. But I'm not going to start a campaign over it either way. A template gets defined once per article, and if it's properly documented, only those concerned with whatever task is at hand really have to keep it straight. My focus was more on the 'category names', and whether they could be put better in synch with one another. Amongst other concerns, certain phrases translate better than others to certain languages, and with the interwiki ties, English naming ought try to come up with names that translate 'literally' both naturally and easily to as many non-English languages as possible. If swallowing the occasional odd bit of English makes that interwiki connectedness go better, well, English speakers know all about being able to say things in many different ways! <G>

This strikes me as a good one to pose to our ole acquaintance Duesentrieb. Or perhaps the M:Communications committee. I don't think the political division vs Subdivisions is much of a poser, and with both trees having:

• this: Category:Categories_by_country --Categories_by_country
• and: Category:Subdivisions_by_country --Subdivisions_by_country

the real key is synching the two category systems to agree on the sub-cats as is feasible.
{{Commonscat1A}} and {{Wikipediacat1A}} both handle the names disjunctures just fine. One has to root a bit sometime to find the parrallel category, but it's usually only a parent cat or grandparent cat click or two away in needed research, if you'll allow the stretch. With the templates in place, it's a gimme--the answers are there for all to read and click.
If we can get the more immature people on the commons to accept the template (Big grin- Intrigued, the {{catlst}} variants on the commons stayed for commons only, but were and have been deleted with respect to wikipedia cross links! Ahhh -- there's a whiff in the air -- the refined odor of nationalistic impulses, me thinks! I suspect they'll be after wikipediacat/1A again soon. Mainly seems to be opposed by the de: folks, but that's more strong impression than systematically examined checking.)

Lastly, the Category redirect capability was in Beta test last I heard (Wikipedia talk: Categories for discussion#Propose tagging with both and expanding use of Cat redirects overall two months back), and even now works to get people to the proper category if hung on an improper name, so to speak. Rick Block, Robert G, and I all agreed then that hanging both a {category redirect} AND #redirect [Right cat] pretty much covered all the bases so long as Robot G was running (which of course it's not now--you sure you don't want to take that over. They even want it on the commons per comments by pfctdactalays on one commons village pump post circa Mid March.), in that it fixed up and replaced the wrong names with the good names. From the bugzilla page, if I understood it, the redirect of a Cat name may do that too. OTOH, that's contrary to what the commons wants, which is to keep a Fr:category name in place, but have it show up and link back in whatlinks here for the main (English) cat name--that is the two cat names are totally aliased to one another. I can only infer which action may be site selectable, but either way, the future will make renaming categories or redirecting them far less dicey. //FrankB 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

2) ... on that width parameter the other day... you missed the double use of the same parameter name despite my hint.

Oops – I hope all is now resolved;

Not quite. The issue of fixed width versus dynamic probably needs aired on the village pump. I've an email off to CBD asking if their is a supportive technical basis for my observations, which may shed light on the ex/em's choices. Meanwhile, the admin that finally responded late Saturday evening just reverted it without the oneline pre-/pre cut N paste code (see my talk) I'd still like to see in there... So, try that the next time you play in there...

You mean the information here, yes...?  (Just checking!)

• Got it in one, but my /tmp6 page has a fair copy of the topline change, feel free to change it at will and test to your hearts content. (Just so happens I installed that change using the parameter {{{infoboxwidth|315px}}} twice this morning. Held up too [in px] [1 & 2 so far. 52 pickup and I have conversed some on this too. <g>) // FrankB 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

3) ... What the heck is width:42ex; doing? px and em I've seen, but ex? Edjamacate me!

... all I know at present is that an 'ex' seems to be half the width of an 'em', but as to whether that's true...

A friendly anon added "Re: 3), see Ex (typography)." to the thread and this issue has prompted me to start revisiting templates where I've used the fixed "px" units in order to replace them with "em" equivalents, so their layouts should have more chance of working with other font-sizes etc. (So, yes, another ongoing task to add to the stream...)

My thanks to the friendly anom, and that all makes sense. Should see how many other nebulous HTML terms have there own articles like em and ex! Good potential there. Sometimes I'm too buried in the wikiforest to use it to clear up the wikiconfusions! // FrankB 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

...Found the email by CBD with this recommendation per our discussions on same circa 19-21 April:

'Othersister' sounds fine. Terms like 'elsewiki', 'crossproject',

'wikinected', et cetera would express the same general concept.

So '{{Othersister}}' is what I'll make the joint pages...

On rereading it suddenly occurred to me that something "sister" doesn't need the description "other", so, unless you've already implemented the template, use something else. (I was going to say {{Sisterproject}} but have obviously lost track...)

Well it's [those name options] on YOUR TALK, and I gave you the date range--so squirm! Seriously, how's Common_cat or cat-links play if other+sister seem redundant. (We can always go sexist, and just say 'Brother'~:) naw!

(I've redirected commonscat1A to Wikipedia1A on the commons, but not more thus far. I been fighting a big problem (of higher priority) with logic misbehaving in an update for {{interwikicat-grp}} and a parallel update of {{interwikitmp-grp}}. See Commons templates X4-X9, iirc, X4 and X7 [X5 is what's_it's_name! <g>] (I'm not even on my laptop this go--but me wifes' on the front porch, no less!)

I think I'm about convinced to create one sub-template with the logic for deciding to make an output, and another to do the table element output isolating the confusion. The pipes in the output data are isolated from the logic itself, {{{namespace}}} is either template or category and so forth.

Then those two templates become a list of calls to the one, which calls the other. The gravy on that approach is only one set of nesting to get/keep straight, it's modular as can be desired, and it will also allow a display at right angles should that be an added parameter, defaulting to the current format. That is a wide template vice a tall template. But thanks for the well wishes... they're needed on this conumdrum! (See the reverts on {{ltsany|Interwikicat-grp}} and note THAT those came after about six solid hours in preview after preview sans success. Grrrrr!
You be well too! // FrankB 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Hope all well, David (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Haven't forgotten about template categorization, but haven't heard from Mike Peel recently (I imagine he's busy with real-life work) so have shelved it again for the time being.

He's probably swamped by finishing and presenting his thesis. If you start to fiddle, you can hang interwikicat-grp here and there! <g> You can ignore mediawiki, wikiquote, wikisource, and wiktionary, but the others should duplicate the templates categories for the most part. Oh, BTW, why Wikipedia metatemplates AND Template namespace templates? I know I've mentioned formatting vs. function vs. typing-aid overlaps too. Submit, might be a useful thing to jell some of this by helping land the interwiki connections, then rethinking from the picture of that commonality of ground gives us. I know ... you have soo oooo oooo much extra time, t'will be no imposition! <g>

Also, looking at Template:Template documentation(edit talk links history)'s creeping forward, and instances where WP:DPP is all but ignored (And places where it's not needed too! e.g. {{Template category}}... [limited numbers if updated]), we need to mount an effort for uniformity of documentation standards and so forth. More politics! Yippeeeeeeee -- like I have the time! Cheers! // FrankB 05:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Signature

Hi, and thanks for your comments. I've allways felt that my sig wasn't the worst cuplrit out there - some are far more lengthy. But point taken - I'll see what I can do. My confusion is your comments regarding text size. I run IE7, and increasing the size doesn't blow anything out at all. It all looks super sexy actually, in comparison to Firefox at least.. However the heavy encoding isn't good for the 'pedia servers so I'll have a chop at it when I have a mo! Cheers!Pedro |  Chat  15:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 21	21 May 2007	About the Signpost

Corporate editing lands in Dutch media	Spoiler warnings may be tweaked
WikiWorld comic: "Disruptive technology"	News and notes: LGBT project mention, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vandalism

Hi Frank. I think the redirector page currently up at Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress is a good starter. It depends on the severity of the vandalism. Basically, it's a simple process... just warn the vandal progressively until you get to the test3 or test4 equivalent level of warning. If the vandal has vandalised to the point where they need to be blocked, just go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism to report the vandalism in order to get them blocked. We no longer put up pages dedicated to glorifying specific vandals. While this can make it a little harder to "investigate" some cases, I happen to agree with it, due to the tenets laid out in Wikipedia:Revert, block, ignore. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC) P.S. Forgive the lateness of my reply.

• OK -- Thanks of course. I was aware of the trend to not reward, err... glorify, errrr, reinforce such miscreants and undesirables, but thought there was (WP:VAN) a dedicated AN/I type of message page to 'keep the lid on' things and coordinate. I guess that's the WP:AI/V (ahem - a basic lack of consitency there! So WP:AIV!!!) purpose? In any event, the ole shortcut didn't have me doing anything more than chasing me tail and scratching me head, (IIRC! <g>) so I yelled! Cheers! // FrankB 15:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Re ...Too close

Hi David,

Need Fresh eyes

re: from Template:Cms-catlist thru edit 'to and in' Template:catlst/doc.

• If you come back reasonably soon (I get this idea we're out of synch these days), a grooming copy edit of the listed Template:Catlst/doc(edit talk links history) page would be appreciated. Note my last will have put some of the usage in the next three links out of kilter and created some likely redundancies, so you may want to survey the whole six, before taking out the knife, Herr "Doktor K". Such should also be Template:Wpd-catlist, Template:Cms-catlist-up, Template:Wpd-catlist-up, Template:catlst, Template:catlist, den you can outen widden de knifein!

• • (Or do you prefer: "... also be Template:Wpd-catlist, Template:Cms-catlist-up, Template:Wpd-catlist-up, Template:catlst, Template:catlist.???)
    This was a stealth question on which default format you think might be 'Best'! <g> FrankB 17:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
    
    
• Hence using 'Cms-catlist' as the baseline. In fact, the other three should probably display fine if their local usage text is commented or cut out entirely, at least that would be a good way to twist the logic in the combined usage page.
• Certain, I am, Template:Catlist(edit talk links history) and Template:Catlst(edit talk links history) are already barren as well of excess local text.
• In any event, the time to avoid errors of assumption and being too close to "it" <g> is here, so use a scalpel Doc, and trim out and clarify!

Keep any changes here on wikipedia, and I'll export. // (duh!) FrankB 18:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Frank,

...I began looking at {{Catlst/doc}} but found it hard to decipher; hopefully I'd find it easier if you generate separate /doc pages for {{Catlst}} and {{Catlist}}. These could then be remerged once I've compared/contrasted/amended (i.e. understood) them. Yours, David (talk) 14:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
(Let's keep this so we can just xpost the whole section -- you stick with italics and we'll both (try <g>) to maintain relative indentating!

Hi, David,
Note: One trick to working with the 'steering logic' in such combined usage pages -- break the includeonly block(s) start by introducing a space so you parse '</incl udeonly>' to evaluate how message portions play together in these /doc type pages. Also, the occasional 'breaking' by forcing an '#if:' temporarily (I just add 'XXX' or something easy to text search when "cleaning up" before the save) can be a big help.

'May be' that splitting them permanently is the better solution. The trial down-link/cross-links do look better if comma delimited, (like the long established {{cat see also}}) so forking the matter seems by use is appropriate. Also provisionally, I'd think we could actually add a parameter that enables either rear-end so any front-end template could be 'hung' and choose CSL or bullets. (Haven't tested that, but using {{!}} should enable such a technique...?)

If they're to see 'heavy use', the WP:DPP is called for either way, but the combining logic in the usage page 'does' get in the way I'll admit cheerfully. Perhaps a switch on 'Pagename' would be a better approach??? At least in clarifying which prose goes to which templates calling the documentation? Would work for interwiki inclusions as well, if it works at all. The "Ifeq:" structure was fine for a few templates, but as a family that's grown and with the possible growth potential, perhaps redesigning for that is in order.

I'm out on the road so not available today, but thanks for taking the look. Bottom line, what I was looking for from you was:

1. What in the documentation is redundant,
2. what is necessary,
3. what relationships need explained and/or clarified.
   

I want all template documentation written so that it is easily digestible to the template ignorant but also lean to thinking we need some provision for the technical savvy to get the gist of relationships with a quick look.

That in turn (now, belatedly! <g>) suggests perhaps using the 'hide or click show' technology to see tech notes for extraneous amplification material? (i.e. That is I'm conjecturing one pre block with fill in the blanks for cut N paste ala many infoboxes, one showing the optional over-rides allowed can then be hidden?)... something along those lines.

Then we 've got had a group of folks using Template:Template documentation(edit talk links history) to pretty up usage pages, which is "OKAY" aesthetically, but I'm pretty sure doesn't work unless the page is a dedicated /doc page. (Apparently hasn't "caught on" based on the Whatlinkshere-- t'was much longer I think back when I first saw it. hmmmm?!!— One wonders at the 'undepreciated status' currently extant. The talk page doesn't even mention the TFD!) Speaking for WP:TSP, the more pages that need ported, updated and maintained, the worse things are and the more likely things are to get out of synch. This despite a general target of only two guaranteed sites, Meta and here on en.wp, with applicability for others based on use/need.

This set of templates (and potential templates) is a good example of why it'd be nice to minimize to one or two usage pages. If each had a dedicated doc page, then most of the material becomes redundant and repeated in NN places. So all this together (not counting categorization!) makes for a "problem set" of criteria in tension either way. Which is where the extra thinking suggested you to me! Thanks, keep it on a burner of some sort! I'll be expanding the usage of some as I clean up the old call forms to the new {{commoncats}}... which is another which needs some clear documentation! (I can only take so much 'template work' in a given week these days. I find your suggestion to work more in article space was some of the best advice I've ever received and taken!!! Thanks again for THAT too!) Be well! // FrankB 17:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Your message

re- Your message

Loads of double redirects need quick cure.

Hi! (Really just figured I'd pick on you so could say THAT! It's been a while!) Can you do one of your 'admin trick things' and swap Grantville%2C_West_Virginia (edit [[|talk]] links history) and Grantville, WV (edit talk links history). Note the long form name is virtually never used, and the 'helpful soul' who set it up with the move (sans discussion) was really unhelpful, inasmuch as he effectively created all those double redirects AND mixed in the name of a fictional town which was chosen with forethought so as to be both plenty unique and NOT confusable with the naming conventions applicable to real places. Sigh! I'll set the {{R from alternative name}} up after the move. Add a note in the talk page so we don't get a repeat, if you would. Pasting a copy of this should suffice, or whatever. I'd do that, but may complicate your 'trick'.

2) Before closing, just looked over the edits. Do you think this page would be better as a Fictional towns and cities in Germany or should it stay as the sole occupant in Fictional towns and cities in West Virginia. Hmmmm!?? In the former, there are a couple of other candidates, albeit currently redlinked names like Badenburg, so I'll CFD in that direction, I think. Thanks and have a great summer! // FrankB 23:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what you want me to do, but the full title is the Wikipedia standard, I'm afraid (for good reason, of course; abbreviations for U.S. states are obscure outside North America – I can never remember most of them – so the full title is much clearer). I don't know whether this is usually extended to fictional places, though I think it is. I'll check into the double redirects (no special admin trick, unfortunately — I'll just trawl through them, correcting each one in turn...). --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• Grantville, WV (edit talk links history) - Grantville, West Virginia (edit talk links history)
• I sure hope you haven't bothered with those fixups! The point is we have different parts of the naming conventions somewhat in conflict since the fiction guidelines more or less just say to name it so there is no confusion with a real place. Second, it's almost always used as a pipetricked form, and if West Virginia is mentioned, that is given in it's own link, so such a 'long name' is both inaccurate (The town in in 1630's THURINGIA, NOT West Virginia!) and creates extra typing. Sigh. That extra work is why I made the swap request. Being fictional, either name is unique enough, but the place's actual geographical status is wholly on the wrong continent no matter how we name it!
• Thanks no matter what you do, but if you haven't 'taken up the sword', let the 'old plowshare alone' if you think my position (and request) is wrong and I'll take it up with the few others tending these pages. It's time to give them another spate of effort no matter what. The next major novels scheduled in October. Cheers and thanks! // FrankB 13:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I've had to undo your page-move, I'm afraid, as cut-and-paste moves are expressly forbidden. So far as I understand the situation, this is a fictional town in a fictional universe in which it's actually in Thuringia — so why not rename it to Grantville, Thuringia? As it's not in West Virginia, I don't see that using an abbreviation helps, as it's not in WV either... --Mel Etitis (Talk) 13:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

-) Mea Culpa, AhhhhChooo.
   I'm afraid I'm not that lawful when it's 1.) trivial 2.) consuming time for no gain 3.) better the way I judges it originally, and certainly 4.) Just putting a lot of other things to rights! and 5.) Exercising reasonable editorial discretion!!! [It THIS really worth EITHER OF OUR TIME??? Hellbells , Mel! unbend a little now and then. This isn't student-teacher stuff.]

a) ... and which is why I asked for the swap.

b) Arrrgh -- I care because it saves typing -- my fingers are short and clumsy and my spelling sucks.

c) So far as I can see the only thing that really matters in the fictional naming criteria is the name is clarly disambigualated from confusion with other (real) places, so could call it GV, but I set it up so it wouldn't need disambigulated. Sigh. Gotta run. RL conflicts coming on fast. Have a good weekend. We're entertaining. // FrankB 14:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Whatever you used to subst the title on my page really needs simplified in concept. /* {{#if:Your message|[[user talk:Mel Etitis#Basic admin trick needed|Your message]] | [[user talk:Mel Etitis#Basic admin trick needed|Mel Etitis#Basic admin trick needed]]}} */ leaves no room to type a summary!!! FrankB

1. Sorry about the page-move business, but it really is absolutely forbidden for anyone to do it ever under any circumstances. It's not a matter of anyone unbending or refusing to...
2. As the redirects are in place, you shouldn't need to type any more, whichever name is used, surely?
3. I didn't subst anything (I just typed "Your message") — I'd assumed that you had... How peculiar. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 14:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

re:

1. Absolutely absolutely? Hmmmm... I'll consider my hand slapped but at least I doc such on talks! Shrug... This is no big deal, I just prefer to not have the double redirects as I consider that longer name even more deceptive and potentially misleading. Eric Flint chose the name so their wouldn't be a name conflict with a real town though, so at least there's zero chance of that unless mannington changes it's name. They're getting a fair bit of tourist trade from the series... I visited myself last year as a side trip between Pittsburgh on the way to Washington, D.C. with the family.
2. With 3-5 new books a year, and the whole with much neglect and needing TLC, whose to say how often new phrasing, rephrasing, etc. will call for the link? My Crystal ball broke when I dropped it about age three and a half, so maybe you know something I don't???
3. Ahh... Then I probably subst {{Ut}} and forgot myself. Usually do that under a title though in a 're: ________' line, as I find links as titles as being less than efficacious usually... escpecially for later linking to using pagename#section title... but was editing to remain faithful to your chosen section name it appears. // FrankB 14:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• I've just checked, and there aren't any double redirects; have you already dealt with them? Grantville, Thuringia noy OK, by the way? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 16:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not fond of this solution-- still extra keystrokes, plus conflicts with the sense of how the name is usually introduced--as an explaination of the overall plot concept almost invariably in the introductions, so might add a layer of confusion if someone used THAT without a pipetrick. I can't control that, so best not to have the temptation! Let's just stay with the status quo ante from Thursday and before.
  
  2.) My Bad...I was miscalling single redirects 'Double redirects', as I as a rule, try to not use any redirect name on a page, but as the 'WV' gets to the 'West Virginia' you and the page mover interpret as more in line with the WP:NAME criteria; besides... I've held my nose at far worse around here <BSEG>. This kind of thing really doesn't matter unless it affects someone's time down the road, so I'd say just let it alone, and we can hold our noses and trudge on to other things which matter. The article page is sufficient to the task by any name of making it clear the town is a fictional entity. Nothing more is 'really' needed. Thanks for your time! I'm overdue on the grounds maintainence--the sun came out and we had a long spate of rainy days so my gardening has barely started, much less neared being finished! Today's a national holiday here (Memorial Day) and I'm going to use most of the rest of it for family and grounds! Thanks again and, ttfn // FrankB 19:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Re templates

Hi again Frank,
I've kept this (and this out of the archive as I've been meaning to respond to your thoughts there. Here goes:

Seems to me there is need for much additional cat work on templates. Some skelaton needs be defined as a primary scheme, that other things link into...

...Lastly, like maps, there is no reason there can't be more than one scheme. You seem to want to monotrack things, and not everyone thinks the same way relationally...

This basic tension, between multiple ways into the template categories ("Templates by X", "Templates by Y", "Templates by Z", etc, etc) vs. those multiple ways overloading the categories' contents is what's been bouncing around in the back of my mind, as I'm only too aware that there's more than one way to skin the proverbial cat. I think, though, that most folk who aren't already familiar with rooting around template categories would be most likely to turn up at Category:Wikipedia templates looking to see if there's a template relevant to the subject area of the article they're editing; if this hunch is sound, I reckon it implies transferring the current Category:Wikipedia templates by subject area categories to the top-level Category:Wikipedia templates (as suggested here). It's a similar idea to the (modern) maps' categories taking precedence over the old maps' categories at the Commons. The question here, though, is whether or not you/Mike Peel/anyone else think that approach can work here; and, if so, whether Category:Wikipedia templates by subject area is most suitable to take precedence. (It might not be for regular template manipulators such as ourselves, but I'm trying to imagine what the more general user would find most useful.)

Re Category:Function templates:

...the contents are mostly Typing-aid templates, meaning we've an categorical redundancy, or an opportunity to make a finer disctinction. I can buy into a 'string function templates' and 'math function templates' category, but 'function templates without type delineation leads to a lot of vauge possible interpretations.

I agree that "Function" templates is probably not an optimal name (especially for the mathematicians out there) but neither, I feel, is "Typing-aid" templates; I recognize the intention, but, for me, it brings to mind Mavis Beacon and the like!  So, if not "Function" templates vs. Formatting templates, or "Typing-aid" templates" vs. Formatting templates, any other ideas...?

Re Category:Miscellaneous templates:

...to my way of thinking Miscellaneous templates would and should hold general purpose templates which really cross most page namespace boundaries in practice, but you guys have all but depopulated that category...

...due, if I remember correctly, to the inherent vagueness in "Miscellaneous" templates – how's that for irony...?...!

Finally (for now!), re "Wikipedia...":

Keypoint: What practical use is the word "Wikipedia" on a SITE named Wikipedia...

(Assuming you mean "Category:Wikipedia templates" rather than "Category:Templates", etc)
I'm not sure how/when adding "Wikipedia" before some of the (near-)top-level template category names arose, but I'm guessing it stems from a desire to distinguish between templates as in (say) blueprints used by designers/manufacturers/etc at large and templates as designed/used in Wikipedia. Whether or not that's a distinction worth making, however, I'm not sure; for now, I suspect it probably isn't, but am going along with it. So, something else to consider – but not, I'd say, before the above.

Hope all well, David (talk) 22:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Back David!

Got your last, and don't know where it leaves us strategically, but submit this idea above of tagging the up-tree could help at least clarify some of the key nodes in the issue.

I can see from the date disparity we're just storming along swiftly here! <BSEG>!!! [Well, I guess progress IS COMENSURATE with the PAY, at that!] <2X LOL>

Your point that thinking of how the (what I call) the "lay editor" perceives and uses and might think from the aspect of categories is the crux--AND a point where I wish I had a crystal ball as well. More so from the standpoint of what is a good level of template documentation, than cats, but the two are certainly related strongly.

The depreciation because of vaugeness of names like Miscellaneous templates, Typing-aid templates, and even Function templates is of course ironic since in general, a vauge name can be seen as a vehicle for hoping to get a clue as to where the kind of templates one is interested in locating may be found... because finding a 'name in such a list as seems promising' along the lines of the kind one is seeking... leads to successive links wherein any one link traversed may give the one seeking a peek at templates 'other' categorizations within or other clues and suggestions as to where to go next, and THAT look or the one after, or the one after that, may thus lead to the "POT O' GOLD" category' -- e.g Table formatting templates, or MSIE Font Fix templates, or whatever.

God knows, at least half the time I go to find a category I'm looking for, it takes me at least three or four link navigations starting with something "I KNOW" is and should somehow be related... which is perhaps why I like the big list model--bad memory! <g>

Aesops sytle 'moral' is obvious-- don't focus only on the first degree relationships either, nor with overwhelming narrow exactness when categorizing such. (These aren't articles, but tools--so can fit into the typical toolboxes of a lot of different trades, if you'll permit me a poorish metaphor.) Very much the same deal with Maps, I fear--differing schema from list (by year, century, cartographer), by type (relief, political, roadmap, etc.) and so forth. And what that means, is tools for different needs by many possible uses.

That in turn suggests perhaps you and Mike should have just been adding your categorization scheme in many or most cases to what was already in place, not replacing it much of the time. Shrug, water over the Dam. I did like the 'Namespace by use aspect', but again, its to me a parallel schema, not necessarily the "Holy writ". (Though making it the fundamental schema makes some sense--I'm not sure it'd be the best path for that though--which is why I suggest the start below from the current status quo ante.) // FrankB 19:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Going Forward

What to do Going Forward? I submit starting by documenting the structure in place now, and document in one page the various category "Blurb"s in an alphabetically arranged list of template categories surveying the purpose of the extant categories would be a good analysis tool to see what is next, plus have long term value as a start on documenting things. Something along the lines of Wikipedia:templates and it's sub-pages, but focused on defining the list of categories and their putative purpose would be a way to start sharing the grief and the effort and knowledge. Whatever is done, it should be comprehensible to lay editors and template savvy alike.

• Just brainstorming really, but: Shortcut WP:TCS, for Wikipedia:Template Categorization Schemes is available.
  

• Once you have a comprehenisive list documenting what's 'defined' (what's doubly so, missing, etc. will pop out, I would think. You may find the cut and paste friendly nature of {{Template list}} to be a valuable aid there to define the task--that way you can build a list of contents of categories from the categories in a single traversal of the tree only editing a single preview page, or notepad (text editor) starter page. Similarly, {{catlist}} / {{catlst}} or such can be an big assist. A little reordering and alphabetization (using one of those) once you have the cat tree all visisted and listed, and you can have a comprehensive alphabetical list of all template categories extant. Steal logic (code) from Template:Catlst(edit talk links history) if you need higher numbers in {{Template list}} (That part is not essential, and could be left for latter analysis), and this change shows a form reverted because it generated said list in a single column, not the desired intent at all--but you may find that form of display to be quite useful. Putting that deleted 'div style=' around the whole template for any of these should do the same, giving a list in a single column to further cut and paste and global edit into sections and links using {{lts}} or such.
  

• Another thought... a second possible benefit on that manual techique... a second page could be used to document by cat page, the parent relationships, since they're being compended in the aggregate above -- the second page lists each cat and it's parents relationally, so would show brain farts and other places that need adjustments. That would be a alphabetical list of category lists using {{wpd-catlist}} (or a customized form with boilerplate changes--I'D JUST LIST the category page in discussion as the first link, or as part of the LABEL= field with a customized front end) as I'm visualizing this... each just listing the pertinent parents of the given page being indexed.
  

this suggestion by you (i.e. where you list some things alphabetically) strikes me as a KEEPER, too! (My Yikes! comment not actually addressing that MERIT!) However the date of that posting and Category:Wikipedia templates by subject area (just mentioned in your last twice no less-- guess you didn't want me to miss that name! <g>), which seems it's natural parent are a bit out of whack... (perhaps a "Revise and Extend" on some of these discussions signifying what was decided and came about is in order occasionally? I do so now and then on my talks and even on general talks, when it seems like it will aid clarity and fixup context for anyone reading later. [myself included! <G>]).

• Me, I think I'd start by combining all this discussion on a Wikipedia talk as listed between whomever, so people can see all pertinent discussions and go from there.
  

• Secondly, it would be a place to discuss all this stuff and related issues on a central talk so other brainpower can be engaged. Not to mention a place to recruit such manpower. Alas one cannot have lessened work without loosing partial control.
  

I'm perhaps missing how you mean the term 'Precedence' in asking about/discussing the merits of Category:Wikipedia templates by subject area-- but I think it should certainly be a immediate daughter of Wikipedia: templates, if that's what you are asking—as should any scheme for template categorisation.

• All the category schemes need to end in one common point after all, and if something like those tagged with Tracking Category reach Wikipedia administration by their path through Tracking categories, this would be an equivalent sort of administrative mechanism, but perhaps ending the parallel path in THAT latter category (Wikipedia administration) and using {{catlist}} to document sidelinks is a better place and more faithful to not putting loops in categorization? I believe it would be to the one path only category purists--meaning all such "schemes" should do the same... but ending with Wikipedia templates as a common root, can be argued for as well. Flip a coin and pick one! <g>
  

• re: I agree that "Function" templates is probably not an optimal name (especially for the mathematicians out there) but neither, I feel, is "Typing-aid" templates; I recognize the intention, but, for me, it brings to mind Mavis Beacon and the like! So, if not "Function" templates vs. Formatting templates, or "Typing-aid" templates" vs. Formatting templates, any other ideas...?
  

I think the latter connotes the saving of 'editor keystroke savers' better, but perhaps that's the sortof answer needed in some phrase permutation? At least that's what I mean when I say typing saver, or Typing-aid templates, and I know I coined the latter name. This genre is one I'd certainly like seen well organized and exposed to the lay editor much better, and probably is a great place to start a comprehensive documentation page for lay users exposition and reference.

• re: (Assuming you mean "Category:Wikipedia templates" rather than "Category:Templates", etc)
  I'm not sure how/when adding "Wikipedia" before some of the (near-)top-level template category names arose, but I'm guessing it stems from a desire to distinguish between templates as in (say) blueprints used by designers/manufacturers/etc at large and templates as designed/used in Wikipedia. Whether or not that's a distinction worth making, however, I'm not sure; for now, I suspect it probably isn't, but am going along with it. So, something else to consider – but not, I'd say, before the above.
  

I suspect there is some WP:NAME rationale as well, but believe 'templates' satisfies the distiction plenty between a generic (article) category and a template page, and if it doesn't, {{Template category}} tagging certainly dissolves any possible confusion!

I entertained last night, so my brain to too fried to address more now... but then this is over long already! <g> I'm likely to be increasingly scarce for the early summer and am already timesharing my template and category work with "therapuetic" article editing. Incremental refinements can just 'Damn Well Wait' until they pay be better for our time! <G> Have a good day. // FrankB 19:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 22	28 May 2007	About the Signpost

Controversy over biographies compounded when leading participant blocked	Norwegian Wikipedian, journalist dies at 59
WikiWorld comic: "Five-second rule"	News and notes: Wikipedian dies, Alexa rank, Jimbo/Colbert, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

How stubs work

Hi FrankB - I see you've recently tried to use stub templates as thought hey were parameterised. They're not. Have a look at the correction I made to Spanish road to see how they should be formed :) Grutness...wha? 00:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

FYI: I routinely add documentation sorts of comments as extra template params... to the servers/computers they just end up adding to the bit bucket ... and for the rest of us.... little gingerbread clues for kids wandering in de lack of information forest, so to speak. Besides, I can only seem to nail the stub names maybe half the time, and like this, when I'm already overdue for something I should'a been doin' in real life. Sigh! (Nice to see someone is awake out there though! LOL) Cheers, and all fixups gratefully appreciated, so thanks too! // FrankB 02:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense. I wondered if you were doing some kind of "parameterise just in case" thing - FWIW, almost all geo-stubs now use CountryName-geo-stub (a lot actually split further into country subdivisions). As far as the Spanish Netherlands are concerned, modern boundaries are used, so Belgium-geo-stub is probably the closest, though in the case of that particular stub a more general euro-road-stub and euro-hist-stub probably make as much sense as trying to divide it into individual countries and using geo-stubs. Grutness...wha? 01:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't know that it matters. I expect I'll end up doing the expansion inasmuch as I dropped whatever $$$ last night for a used one of these — then again, the terminus on the low countries end is liable to be a many pathed thing... Don't have that luxury going through the Alps though. I'm curious as to whether it be through the cousin Hapburg's turf in Austria, or whether perhaps it went through farther west in Swiss lands. I suspect the later, and both are feasible as I know it passed through Franconia which is now northern Bavaria, but you don't want to march troops any extra distance when you're lucky to make 15 miles a day—on A GOOD DAY! <G> (Modern movement rates would astound even Napoleon!) The canton's pikemen were no laggards, but the Swiss were never one to turn away a money making opportunity--there be a smell of tolls in the air, and they wouldn't want to piss off the 800# Military Gorilla of the day. The Spanish hadn't lost a land battle for well over a century by the start of the era. That suggests a terminus somewhere East of Grenoble around Torino or Milan, if I remember my Italian Geography.

Stub aliasing

I'm a little surprised stub sorting doesn't do a lot of aliasing. There's always {{r from other template}}, or as many tags as they have, it's make sense to modify that to 'r from other stub template' and have a separate cat just for the alias flavors. The more permutations the better--people don't have perfect recall, nor think the same way--particularly when they're really just stubbing in something as a side show to a major edit elsewhere. Time is precious after all. There's no reason the computer can't do that sort of thing, and every reason to help people get a syntax that works so there is less maintenance work for the man-power doing that thankless job. If you aren't with stub-sorting let me know--I think I'll suggest that to Valentinian and Pegship, who are last I knew. Thanks! (Hmmm closing thought, let me try this obviousity: Help:stub, Help:stub sorting? OK-- some joy! I'll have to try and remember that works. // FrankB 02:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:WSS actually works in the opposite way to that by trying to reduce the number of redirects as much as possible, and for good reason. There is a set standard for stub naming, which makes it easy to work out exactly what name a stub template should have. Almost by definition, any redirects will have names which don't follow that naming pattern. The less adherence to the naming pattern there is, the more probability there will be that parallel stubs with the same purpose are created. Okay, they could be redirected once found to the standard name, but redirects to templates are generally frowned on because they increase server load (far more so than redirects to pages) - this is one of the reasons why there are so few {{r from other template}}s in use in comparison to the vast number of Wikipedia templates. There are also a number of (how to put this politely?) "original thinkers" out there who decide that redirects are really better as completely separate parallel templates. Yes, it probably takes a little more time and effort to sort this way, you're right, but as far as the maintenance of the different stub types themselves is concerned, it's a lot easier with as few redirects as possible. Grutness...wha? 05:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if you can back up the "increased server loading" claim with any real fact. According to Brion Vibber, pages are cached "Aggressively"... so what's one jumpto cost in compositing a page? Hardly something one could call a "load". Templates on lots of pages, OTOH, do make for an update que issue when changed, simply because all those cached pages have to be recomposited--the system doesn't know, nor have anyway to tell a change is trivial (+/- a cat say, or adding an inline comment; the former updates a specific data record, the latter can be a problem if it's in a template). But hey, who's going to change a redirected template name's content very often?

The problem I have with that kind of 'rigidity' (or with categories, or any 'forced compliance to some naming scheme' outside articles naming conventions) is that it forces people to learn the standard and "code of permissible order and permissible abbreviations and overall style (sytax of putting all together)" when they're volunteers offering free time and totally disinterested in stubs per se, it's naming schema especially, but are just trying to do the right classification while taking care of the business they do care about. Worse, it normally requires that they remember it, or waste time again relearning something which is pretty dry and perhaps used once a month. (I certainly don't start more articles than that normally! <g>) Look at this instance, I made a good faith effort of two or three things that seemed sensible, and had to give up, or go research it. Bam-- Another {tl|stub}}, which costs someone else time, AND THAT I hate. But I also have to look out for myself occasionally, so this time... well you found them! <g>

We went around and around on 'unambiguous' names in reorganizing Maps category's names last year on the Commons, so too this past winter with category names for templates--which directly affects me, so naming issues aren't simple, but when there is a redirect used, they can be much easier on the userS!

Strikes me that the policy as is, is like dropping a small walnut on your footsie--1,000 times a day-- eventually, it's gonna hurt! There have to be some days when there is a large backlog on things just tagged with {{stub}}--because all the learning curves (and the nuances in them! The order thing and syntaxes!) get to be really taxing and indeed, daunting to the newcomer. For my part, I'll be one happy camper when the redirect a category (directly) system software change (last I heard, t'was in Beta test somewhere) comes through. Half or more of alternative naming on CFD will disappear as reasons to debate or nominate stuff. I'm not sure why having geo-stub-germany, germany-geo-stub, geo-germany-stub, and stub-geo-germany would add to the maintenance load--they'd all end up in the same category. Anyway, thanks for the reply... even if I don't get it, or agree--the courtesy and attempt to get through is appreciated. (Yawn) Ooops!!! Need to finish up and get to bed! G'night! // FrankB 06:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi back atcha

I'll try that template thing when/if my brain kicks back in...Don't know what happened with the strikeouts on that page. I've had it on my watchlist but never saw THAT coming. Hm. Right now I'm dealing with end-of-school-year madness at the library, so just squeezing in a little maintenance editing here & there. After June 11 I'll have a nice cuppa & sit down. Nice to hear from you! Her Pegship (tis herself) 04:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Physical address ("Is this up your alley?"), templates

Hi Frank,
I began trying to copyedit the above here but realized that while I could give some feedback about the prose, I don't know enough about the subject in order to edit it myself (i.e. yes, I'm not that far up the alley!). If you think it might help, I could continue annotating the copy linked above, but thought I'd check first.
Meanwhile, thanks for your meaty "Going Forward" reply re templates; I hope to give it some attention soon. Yours, David (talk) 03:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your editprotected request

See here. Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers back! -- Ping here. Sorry 'bout that! // FrankB 15:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. One has to wonder how many links labeled 'here' are on Wikipedia talk pages! Yikes we're either an unimaginative lot, or the word is a contender with "If" for high utility champion! <BSEG> -- FAB

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 23	4 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Sockpuppeting administrator desysopped, banned	Admin restored after desysopping; dispute centers on suitability of certain biographies
Controversial RFA suspended, results pending	Dutch government provides freely licensed photos
WikiWorld comic: "John Hodgman"	News and notes: Another Wikipedian dies, brand survey, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

re: Whadda ya think

I have no opinions on the content dispute. That is up to those of you involved in editing the applicable articles to decide. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 19:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not in that either... I just followed you over from this and the "unhelpfulness" implicit in the name "1 (BTC)" struck me. I tried to tidy up THAT article some, but it needs more TLC than I have time for... besides I'm outside O'Boston and NYC is 'de Verbotten Evil Empire' as a sports fan! // FrankB 20:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, I was misunderstood. I was not trying to tie you to the edit dispute. I was simply saying that I haven't looked into the subject at all and so I don't have an opinion. I also am not that interested in NY subways so I doubt I will look into it. It is obvious from the talk page & elswehere that there are other editors (including yourself) that have opinions in addition to those two that were edit waring and I will leave it up to you all to work it out. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 21:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

NYC Subway

Actually there are two relevant guidelines here:

Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Piping, specifically "This guidance to avoid piping means that a link to a redirect term will sometimes be preferred to a direct link, if the redirect term contains the disambiguation title and the redirect target does not. For example, in Delta (disambiguation), a link to the redirect term Delta Quadrant would be preferred over its target, Galactic quadrants (Star Trek)."

Anyway, what would you recommend for the name of articles like BMT 12? --NE2 21:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, I was just "In" the first you listed, but the reason that I'm surprised, and that others may be changing such is the old way was the opposite. Might be interesting to see when and how recently that nugget changed. Personally, I can live with redirects so long as they're categorized, so the 'new way' is agreeable to me. I create my share of redirects to historic terms.

The trouble with BMT is does it mean Bowel Movement Twice (if you've had a baby, you'll relate REALLY! to that one!) or something else. There needs be some context for people to grasp such acronyms, and as a title, that means they should be avoided. If NYC is using abbreviations as does our MBTA, it presents some problems, but this kind of naming is usually schemed out together in a WikiProject page (to dodge adroitly!). Naw -- I have opinions -- just don't recollect what BMT means. Ok -- so go long, like Joe Willy Namath. "Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Corporation 12 train"... or line or whatever specifically that means. Corp. would be acceptable to me, but some would say no to that, so avoid such reworking and just hold yer nose and stay long. Really, the project group can usually make such decisions stick, so I'd hammer it out on the project page and use whatever. "BMT Corp. 12" would be better as a redirect, as it gives some context. From what I can see though, much of the problem will vanish if you all tone down the overuse of links to the recommended once per article page. BMT 12 in text has context within the article, so long as "Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT)" appears up high. Hope that makes sense. // FrankB 22:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Del request

Apparently sb took care of them before me :) -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  03:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! The db was linking some strange pages in, so I thought it best to attempt to expedite. // FrankB 17:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Help with template:-

Hi there,

You seem to be a good source for help, so I thought I'd ask. If the following appears in an article source:

{{-}}

What does that do? Marc Shepherd 15:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

1) Sorry bout the delay--RL intrudes now and then!

2) Check templates out using {{Lts}} or {{tiw}} from inside any edit window 'preview' like this:
Template:-(edit talk links history),
Template:! (backlinks edit),
Template:!!(edit talk links history)
and so forth... the help for lts lists a bunch of similar utilities. Just navigate using the edit link to examin under the hood and see what's what.

3) Specifically, it does the same as HTML <Br Clear="all"> which forces floating elements to use that point as and ending point, so to speak and as I understand it. I'm not a HTML savant, by any means. Basically, what comes after and what comes before makes up two separate page compositions. The one above being forcibly ended by the clear="All" aspect. Should the dash template appear after a floating element such as a picture, it will prevent wrapping of text which follows and should display "up and around" to the sides of the floating element... for example, an image, an infobox, or a TOC.

4) See usage and link to wikipage (help) on {{TOCnestright}} which link presents some issues, and one instance of a discussion of when this is useful.

Hope that helps // FrankB 22:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Re your latest

Hi Frank,

I may be leaving Wiki's altogether very soon ... Bottom line, I'm sick and tired of things being decided by a small group of people and such with no quorum required, nor widescale notifications, et. al. I bust my butt and get shit on when I could be doing something to make money. More the fool for that--all of us really...

I suppose this is one of the drawbacks – or maybe "pragmatic realities" – of a project the size of Wikipedia; at any one time, I imagine 99% of issues each have only a handful of users involved. The more specialized the wiki, however, the more I guess such a handful may resemble a quorum, so perhaps there's a wiki out there where you'd find it more satisfying to contribute (and link to Wikipedia)... I haven't gone looking, so have none to suggest, but I imagine they're out there. (If you take a look and find something interesting, I'd be intrigued to know!)
Meanwhile, if there is sufficient turnover of people involved in an issue, perhaps nothing is ever impossible, only stalled. Suddenly philosophical, David (talk) 09:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks David, we'll have to see what happens. The politics just gets me down. // FrankB 22:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)

The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 24	11 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Privacy report lists Wikipedia among best sites, but needing improvement	Board candidacies open, elections planned
WikiWorld comic: "Why did Mike the Headless Chicken cross the road?"	News and notes: Ontario error, no consensus RFA, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:s-hou

I like the changed you made to this template, they look very nice and have some nice functions that my limited knowledge of code could not do. However, I am wondering if you can form up one more miracle for me...is it possible to make everything but the royal house header optional? And by that I mean is it possible to make it so the code does not even leave a trace of "born" if the template is being used for something else. I am wondering because I want to merge Template:s-hno back into Template:s-hou but that is impossible unless I can have a template that is capable of only showing the royal house (and cadet house) and nothing more. Tell me what you think. Thank you!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 02:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got it working, although you may want to clean it up so it still looks pretty. I just did the same thing you had for Died with Born, thereby making everything optional.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 02:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

It was agreed by WP:SBS that while the option of adding an individual's name to the succession box may be a helpful addition, the debates and conflicts over proper titles and names may overwhelm the convenience of it. Many people who have succession boxes were rarely called by the name that their page is named. Also, many had multiple titles, while the page only lists one. For example, Henry IV of France also held the regnal title King of Navarre as a part of his official title, but that portion of his name is not on the title's header. Overall, it simply seems that the name of the page does not consistantly match the true name of the individual enough to allow this option currently. I loved the idea and I wish it could work but I don't see how it can right now.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 18:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

A) With an option of defining "|name=" one can list ALL the titles of a personage, for example, a list separated by HTML line breaks (br), or the "HISTORIC Handle" which seems most appropriate.
B) The concept of having an override for {PAGENAME} came about for that very reason, so your "logic" strikes me as somewhat flawed.
C) The best default is to the page name of the article MOST OF THE TIME, as that is the name the people having a handle on the history of the person think best (with a due nod to naming conventions, natch).
D) Your WT:SBS page holds zero discussion on the matter, so I'm afraid I need some convincing on whether your project mates agree with you.
E) While I can conceive (with a strain) that someone may under some weird and unusual circumstance want to have NO Title, that can be accomplished by defining name=&nbsp;—which I believe I'd documented when annotating the /doc page. If not, my bad, but if that unusual circumstance is a governing parametric, there are other ways to logically disable the default {PAGENAME} without breaking it in most pages where it is, you agree beneficial. This snippet would do it:

{{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{{name}}}|{{#if:{{{inhibit|}}}|<!--do nothing-->|{{PAGENAME}} }} }}, for example.

Alternatively (requiring wasteful edits imho, is to just provide the name= without the default to the pagename. But I think that's much less effective. (And certainly "fights" uniformity.)

At the least, I think the matter ought to be given a complete discussion. Pretty odd to have you praising it one day, and then reverting the edit out a few days later. What's the rush??? // FrankB 00:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

After further consideration, I have made the executive decision to reincorporate the name option into the template. The inclusion of the "name" switch makes the addition much more flexible as can be viewed with James I of England and the templates now do look better. I also took the liberty of fixing the problem with the space after "Born:" and also made the royal house title larger than the usual text. Thank you for your work and I hope we can work together sometime. On that note, do you know if there is a way to remove visible lines between rows of a table? I have been trying to figure it out before I release my new templates. Currently, they look a little off. Thank you!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 07:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

On your last

• Think that's a good idea... but glad to hear you put it back.
• On the lines between rows... I usually try to add them, which alas is no help to you! <G> However, your system of templates will either have to redefine Template:S-start(edit talk links history) (contents:{| class="wikitable" style="margin:0.5em auto; font-size:95%;{{#if:{{{noclear|}}}||clear:both;}}" to use another class, or override the parameter in the common.css page that sets those up using a style= add on. The last alternative would be to add the override to the local subtemplate same as you would, for example, colspan=5 or such.

• You can add a style command after a class with generally no problems, but then your change is really global, unless given as an option.

• Which HTML command is the problem is something I'd work out by trial and error. Good HTML expert (Resources) people: User talk:Transhumanist, User talk:CBDunkerson, and User talk:David Kernow.

• If all else fails, scout some names on WP:TFD and many there and especially on it's talk are likely good bets. The three I cited (if available) are my general go-to guys! OTOH, you should be mining the history and talk pages for Template:Succession(edit talk links history) and Template:Succession box(edit talk links history) for programmers who've made significant contributions in the last couple of years.

• If I were you, I'd make damn sure I had some of those folks on the team, as otherwise you're playing with Russian revert roulette. AFAIK, these were considered very stable and "Done" after an overhaul about a year ago. Even colors were debated, so tread carefully! Have you announced your WP:SSB project on the pump? 'Ware sleeping bears! Good luck! // FrankB 08:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:SBS overhaul

WP:SBS is getting a major overhaul with its layout. User:The Duke of Waltham is leading that charge and most of the edits and discussions have migrated to subpages of his such as User_talk:The Duke of Waltham/SBS. His talk page is where the two of us have been working out the remaining bugs in the s- box series. As soon as the guidelines page is updated, he plans to send a release to a number of the related WikiProjects, the project members, and a few of the forums, but the guidelines page still needs some work and many of the members of have been contributing to it from what I understand.

Regarding changing templates, we are actually just fixing some of the internals in a few of them and syncing the non s- boxes to the style where possible. Regarding titles, I am aware that many of them have had discussions and thus most of my title merges that I have completed use one of the previous colors. Quite frankly, though, so many people are creating titles these days that The Duke and I have agreed then need to shrink down to a few less. If you want to see why, see how many there are at User:KuatofKDY/Cleanup List. Many of those title templates at the bottom of the page could fall under a few categories.

Thanks for the work and please give feedback. I liked your need addition so much after that helpful switch.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 17:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll probably look in somewhen in the next few days. One philosphical perspective though based on 30+ years of coding this and that: Much effort here on Wikipedia goes into redoing things others have spent much effort doing. This is not infrequently deliterious, not only because it violates the common sensical sentiment of the old saw: "If it's not broken, don't fix it!"—but more importantly because it causes others extra work and their precious time if a tool (i.e. a subtemplate giving a certain outcome) is suddenly different, or worse, missing!

Consequently, many younger editors here confuse activity with progress and don't appreciate the multipler effect of how they steal time from others used to an old way and tool template. I would caution you all that if you are combining and definitely if you are contemplating eliminating templates that unless your changes do not require adding a parameter to duplicate behaviors and effects, that having a specialty function and the extra name is a really cheap way to get a desired outcome. It's burden on the future is minimal, whereas overcomplicating things by combining much into more capable units almost always makes them harder to use.

Thus you all might want to take a hard look at writing up 'documentation' of what is currently in play first and foremost, before haring off on wide spread changes. OTOH, some complexity can be a good tool as well, see for the guts and relationships between examples like Template:ltscms, Template:ltswpd, Template:ltsmta, Template:wpd-catlist-up, Template:cms-catlist-up, Template:catlst, Template:catlist and so forth. If some of the names you want to 'mostly eliminate' as something rarely needed, such techniques can be used as a front end to simplify the calling of a more complex kernal template, that is probably a good thing. OTOH, the more a template is used on articles, the more protection issues become important, as one vandal can mess up a lot of pages--so a variety of ways of doing the same thing also has benefits of being more anti-vandalistic, so to speak.

Where is there a clear statement of the problems you all percieve and goals that you are trying to achieve. That is to say, the motives behind this effort--t'would be helpful to see what triggered the activities! Heck, need such to recruit help and convince others, so perhaps you can convince me. I'm fairly active in cohercing successsion templates to display what I want in historical articles, so you might say I've some vested interest! <G> Cheers! //FrankB 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Looking at the current James I of England per your prior note, I'm a lot concerned you're all making the boxes much too narrow. For clarity, I'm of the opinion that pipetricking names compliant with the naming conventions for articles is generally a bad idea... especially as using a "friendly nickname" is culturally dependent, and so less is usually a detriment to understanding what is going on, and who is related how to what office and so forth. This of course is much worse for those looking on from other language wiki's who almost universally model and translate our basic articles and so forth. Hence, and aliased link adds to their confusion. (I work a lot on Meta and the Commons, so interlingual issues are matters of import on a daily basis!) Anyway, unless you all are going to float these right or left, the narrower format is striking me as trouble in the making and will make for many an ugly display on pages using full pagenames or even long aliased nickname titles.

Note I am saying that narrowness is likely already causing a fair amount of article ugliness! OTOH, there is no reason one can't add a narrow OPTION, for pages under the Tender Loving Care of an editor actively working it. See for example Template:Template category(edit talk links history) and the whatlinkshere list of Template:Interwikicat-grp(edit talk links history) where both are used in concert. Note that option takes the template from being centered and wide to tall and narrow with a shift left to make room for the second... all to present better together when applicable. That technique would be viable as it doesn't necessitate fixing a whole bunch of pages in some batch process of marathon editting, but instead makes it an individual editorial decision that can be applied on a case by case basis. Your Template:S-start(edit talk links history) will lead, and all else should then follow. Best regards! // FrankB 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Guidelines and s-start

I actually agree with you completely. When the succession box problem was first presented to me, I just wanted to replace the ugly "3D" looking HTML succession boxes with something easier to use and more compliant. I found Template:succession box and used the internals of that to derive the current formula. However, the popularity of it was unknown to me for many months until I got back to editing and realized that many people had begun to add headers and other options. At that point in time, I grabbed all those editors and created WP:SBS to create some rules for editing. Let's just say it ended up being a fighting war where we made some decisions but everyone was still doing their own things. The project went quiet for a while and the page went into disuse.

User:The Duke of Waltham contacted me a few months ago stating his desire to sum up all our discussions, decisions, proposals, etc, and make a guidelines page and act, basically, as the publicity manager for the project. Up until now, we have had no guidelines for making succession boxes and this was resulting in problems across Wikipedia of differently styled templates being used, dating inconsistencies, name inconsistencies, and more recently an explosion of titles, many of which could be better catagorized. That is why the project is at the point it is at now. The guidelines page is almost done and many of the members have contributed their input, and most agree. Some decisions have also been made due to an overwhelming popularity of some features, such as full dates in succession boxes instead of just years. We had originally discouraged that.

Regarding Template:s-start, the mother of so much now on wikipedia, I agree with you completely that it should sit fat and pretty at the bottom of each page and not seem so...narrow. However, my knowledge of code is strangely little. I am less a genius and more of a good copycat who knows what he is looking for when he is looking on codes. Sadly, though, it has escaped me completely on how to make the s-start fat and plumb instead of thin and narrow. So I would like you to help me. Here is the code for the page:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:0.5em auto; font-size:95%;{{#if:{{{noclear|}}}||clear:both;}}"

Can you recreate that code in a way that would make it short and fat. If you want to include the option of narrow, please include that. However, I need to be certain that entering the code {{start}} will produce the correct thing and not error because it needs a pipe or something. I will propose the change myself and even test it if you wish. I have a number of test areas on my own user page that I run all my templates through before posting them.

Thank you for all the help! I want these templates to be perfect.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 20:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• No problemo--and you're quite welcome. All you need is to add a width=xx% (and or perhaps "margin:auto;") statement within the style= quotes (Don't forget a terminating semi-colons!).
  
  I'd suggest using width:{{{infoboxmargin|88%}}}; as the desired change within the existing {{s-start}} style= lines quotes. I use infoboxmargin advisedly, as it's use as an option parameter in various infoboxes is becoming common, and that gives a common term for folks to recall when they want the feature. Alternatively, you can even use two parameter names (or three or ten!) to do the same task. [The parenthesis needed will get a bit dense though! <g>]
  
  "width:{{{width|default}}};" would work equally well (one's an operator, the other a parameter, which is to say a variable), but we had some "issues" in infoboxes where image width (sizing) options and infoboxes overall width were colliding when changed using the same "width:{{{width|default}}}" parameter in effect, causing some unwanted minor side-effects! <G>
  
  Bottom line, you can call it "glops" so long as it's after the "width:" AND before the semi-colon.
  
  FYI--The three curly braces in this form make up wikimarkups first if-then-else capability (now augmented tremendously by parserfunctions), in case you don't recognize the syntax. If "infoboxwidth" is undefined, then the value after the pipe is used as the default. Simple. Some stuff I've written uses that nested about five deep... (e.g. {{{A|{{{B|{{{C|...}}}}}}}}} and so forth!) which gives a capability of precedence arbitration, the most important (one which will override the others) being placed left most.

• Just as an option, you could define the capability to float left or right and if so, automatically alter the default width to 60-65% if desired. My "Suspicion" is page layout on a fair number of minor nobles would benefit from letting the succession box float up beside the list of dead heirs, so to speak! <g> The code for that I'd suggest would be to use a switch on parameter '1', AND have any specified 'infoboxmargin' override the "automatic" default, while the left right overrides the center floating position. If interested, I can probably do that up real quick. (See for example, some of the code in Template:Left60(edit talk links history) or {{left66}} and steal techniques! Template:FixHTML(edit talk links history) uses a switch similar to what I'm thinking! That's very similar in both 'intent' and 'use' to S-start by the way!) Good luck, and keep up the enthusiasm! // FrankB 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 25	18 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikipedia critic's article merged	Board election series: Election information
Admin account apparently compromised, blocked	Controversial RfA withdrawn, bureaucrats fail to clarify consensus
WikiWorld comic: "They Might Be Giants"	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Succession Box Series Problem

Frank, do you know of any way to make something like Template:s-par work so that when you type {{s-par}} the template works? One of the admins is going crazy because she hates the requirement to add a pipe at the end of templates if the template has a switch parameter. She keeps reverting edits and protecting pages and even reverting entire succession box series that I have edited simply because it requires an empty parameter. Please help!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 17:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

SAY WHAT

RE: Template:S-par(edit talk links history) && from http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Stuart_Mill&action=edit

• You must think I want to work for a living!

(<g>)

test 1

stolen actual use

test 2

• Test {{s-par}}

test 3

• Test {{s-par|test=testline|}}

test 4

• Test {{s-par|glops}}

My suggestions

1) From looking at the template, looks like you just need to define a default behavior in the switch.

2) From the history, I see no evidence of any sort of revert as you imply. However, the code within around and about the parameter 'test' suggests that you need to refer this to either CBDunkerson or David Kernow, if my suggestion doesn't get you home. That's a double suggestion if you are indeed in a pissing contest with an admin, and I see BrownHairGirl has protected the template, and they've the tools and clout to argue with her if necessary.

3) Suggest |#default={{{1|Office}}} , which would allow one to specify the office directly as '{1}', or displays "Office" (a sort of subtle error message saying give me more information). Even should one forget to specify it, inside the article context, would make sense to the stray reader-customer.

The other alternative (and I'm not sure I understand your "DESIRED OUTPUT", since is just the collapsed "Non-header bar" as it were in the version I'm currently displaying) would be to move {{S-par}} to {{S-par1}}, where in the senario, s-par then tests for '{1}' and if not given, passes the pipe you desire... again, for reasons inobvious to me in these tests. I see no benefit to that, an empty parameter is an empty parameter, and the parser will treat an empty pipe same as none given, so far as I know. Perhaps you have an error in assumptions?

• Belated Clarification--The newly created redirect 's-par' would be re-written as a front end template for the old 's-par' just moved to 's-par1' with appropriate passalong of parameters. Such works, but don't see the use of the empty pipe per your senario as I understood it.

Since I can't see the effect you are trying for, that's the best I can do for now. Hope that helps. // FrankB 18:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Template Development problem

Fabartus, you have been such a help that you should just join our project WP:SBS. Either way, I have now a question for a template I have been developing for some time now. The sample can be found here and the internal templates used are User:KuatofKDY/Template:s-kid and User:KuatofKDY/Template:s-mar. Look at the template and see how there are lines between each row? I want to remove the lines between the child lines, but still get the same effect. Any advice or help in removing those visible lines? Thanks!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

• First answer and trial here, with one alternative which should work. Let me get a second opinion on the stab I made. I'm really not an HTML guru! Logic, I can do! // FrankB 00:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Intermediate template intro

Hi I'm new to wikipedia and I'm trying to move a substantial portion of the wikipedia templates to my local mediawiki installation.

1. is there a batch process I can use to achieve this? (instead of creating every template page one by one copying and pasting from wikipeida)
2. I would be very grateful if you can point me to a good starting point to understanding the template relationships (I studied the syntax) in terms of hierarchy- what template is built upon other more basic templates- just a pointer to the path in the template forest ;)

Thanks very much for your time!

Gargamel573 17:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)--

1) Unfortunately there is no batch process I know of. All templates (supposedly) can be found in a categorization scheme with the common root category Category:Wikipedia templates(edit talk links history).

2) If might be possible to run a BOT, but AFAIK you'll still need a list to begin with.

3) Sweeping importation of templates would be contraindicated in any respect. The typical template is modular, portable, and optimized by a task, and (lately, this is still settling out and in transition) categorized by groups of such. Only template attributes which need shared between a variety of templates are normally written to involve sectional templates or sub-templates. [My term sectional refers to such that are used to build similar but sectioned info boxes such as for a chemical substance, particularly elements and compounds (e.g. See Silicon (edit talk links history), also, see whatlinkshere for Template:S-start (backlinks edit) which begins one type of succession template. These I call modular and sectional, as you can mix and match and include them by semi-arbitrary order.] Given that categorization, you have heirarchies, see for example the contents of Navigational templates... which is/are merely other categories by application class. The latest re-org, installed classifications by namespace, so Template namespace templates will lead to sub-templates and other templates used within templates (some are for tagging or autocategorization).

4) I presume you're running mediawiki software, so utility templates will work for you, but unless it's a foundation sister project, again, a large majority of templates will do you no good at all. See for example the categories: Interwiki link templates, Internal link templates and Interwiki utility templates.

5) Now there are some generic templates which may do you some good right off, see for example categories: Formatting templates, Function templates, Typing-aid templates, but no matter what you do you're gonna run into the issue of what do you know and what do you need, and how will you remember. In short, having a library of wonderful goodies is just piles of books without organization and a card catalog. We here at wikipedia haven't even gotten to first base on the latter, much less a modern computerized system to replace a card catalog.

6) Others are really specific to articles and specialized tasks (Succession templates, infoboxes, etc. are intertwined with wikipedia standard ways of doing certain things.)

7) You're best bet would be to cultivate a few people and have a few dozen of your people each cultivate a few contacts here you can ask "Is there any thing that will do such and such kind of thing", and just get on with building your site. If you copy too much wholesale, no one will grasp what is there, know about it, or be able to modify and maintain it so that it suites the needs of your mission and problems.

8 I'll be glad to answer inquiries, time permitting, but I'm really weary of templates in a lot of ways, so am not interested in getting into anything in a systematic way. Unfortunately, there is no good guide to templates of generic utility... that is as user help. We're working in that direction, but there are too many chiefs and not enough indians, so things are really sitting right now. Being that it's summer, I'm demotivated in any event. Some of the more useful tools class templates were categorized in Interwiki utility templates, and presuming that's been stable, that would be a good place to start. Good Luck! // FrankB 01:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very very much for the swift and detailed reply!!

Greatly appriciated :)

--Gargamel573 01:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 26	25 June 2007	About the Signpost

Board election series: An interview with the candidates	RfA receives attention, open proxies policy reviewed
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer"	News and notes: Logo error, Norwegian chapter, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Venus

Hi, I don't think a graph about CO₂ trends at Mauna Kea is relevant for an article about Venus. Regards, — BillC ^talk 22:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Whatever... 90% to 0.0380% says a lot to ME though. Makes terraforming a real bitch to contemplate! Cheers! // 19:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Templates

(Vaguely re: your message on my talk page)

It's easy to make mistakes. Also, there isn't much documentation either about that template, which makes it difficult to know what each part does (unless you're very good at mentally parsing parser functions, and/or can read other editor's minds).

This incident had the side-effect of reminding me about Category:Miscellaneous templates. Do you still have objections to me clearing that template out and deleting it? Category:Uncategorized templates can take over its job of an odd-template drawer - that category has the advantage of not appearing to be a permanent home for templates... Mike Peel 17:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• Well, if you see no relevance to the fact five other sisters use that instead of Uncategorized, I guess not. You seem to be stuck on one way of categorizition, so have it as you will. I'm done fighting against anything here. // FrankB 19:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

---

Added 12 Aug 2007

---

Family information and ancestry box

Due to a request by User:The Duke of Waltham, it was suggested I make my family-related templates into a collapsible template. What I cam up with is this:

Complete example of {{s-iss}}, {{s-mar}}, and {{s-kid}} for Henry VIII of England

Family information and ancestry
Marriages and issue
m. 11 June 1509, Catherine of Aragon (16 December 1485 – 6 January 1536)			Henry, Duke of Cornwall (1 January 1511—January 31 1510)
Unnamed son (November 1513—November 1513)
Henry, Duke of Cornwall (December 1514—December 1514)
Mary (18 February 1516—17 November 1558); m. Philip II of Spain (Notes: Later became Queen Mary I of England)
Unnamed child (November 10 1518—November 10 1518)
m. January 25 1533, Anne Boleyn (c. 1501 – May 19 1536)			Elizabeth (7 September 1533—24 March 1603) (Notes: Later became Queen Elizabeth I of England)
Henry Tudor (1534—1534)
Edward Tudor (29 January 1536—29 January 1536)
m. 30 May 1536, Jane Seymour (c. 1507 – 25 October 1537)			Edward (12 October 1537—6 July 1553) (Notes: Later became King Edward VI of England)
m. 6 January 1540, Anne of Cleves (22 September 1515 – 16 July 1557)
m. 28 July 1540, Catherine Howard (c. 1520 – 13 February 1542)
m. 12 July 1543, Catherine Parr (c. 1512 – 5 September 1548)
m. Never married, Elizabeth Blount (c. 1502 – 1540)			Henry (15 June 1519—18 June 1536)
m. Never married, Mary Boleyn (c. 1499 – 19 July 1543)			Catherine Carey (1524—15 January 1568)
Henry Carey (4 March 1526—23 July 1596)
m. Never married, Mary Berkeley )			Thomas Stukley (c. 1520—4 August 1578)
John Perrot (c. 1527—September 1592)
m. Never married, Joan Dyngley )			Etheldreda Malte (c. 1529—aft. 1555)
Notes and references
1. Van de Pas, Leo. Genealogics.org. Copyright 2007.

Now the first problem I found with it is that it does not have an edit option at the top because it is not a part of the Navigation template series. I already tried messing with that series and this turned out to be the best alternative. However, considering that the header line is misaligned due to the absence of the edit option, I am wondering if you know of any way to add that in. Just those nice three little letters that are at the top left corner of the Navigation templates. For the time being, you can just edit that here. I have a copy of this example on my page but I have yet to make a template draft for the "Start" replacement so I am just using the original code.

I also am wondering if there is any way to restore the lines that originally appeared on this template. Mostly with the s-fam feature at the bottom. The family tree is a bit hard to read without the lines and I'd like them back, at least down there.

It has some other problems, mostly related to optional parameters that are not working entirely with the s-chi and s-mar templates, but if you can help fix the first problem, that is really what I am looking for. Thanks Fabartus. You're awesome!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 08:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

1. In case you haven't figured it, I'm very wikimissing these days... (GREAT LOOKING template btw! Kudos... Good Job!!) ... considering the time lag here, I figured I better get an update of needs from you.
2. The lines can be put back by examining the edit CBD did for you and reversing same. I believe he made the border statement: "border:none;", iirc, so substitute "solid", or "groove" for "none". See HTML element and my reference page (where I hide things and techniques I may want to copy someday) here and steal to your hearts content.
3. Edit links are easy, there are several templates which put up different display modes, and I don't have a handle on any save Template:Edit(edit talk links history) as I usually just do an inline adaptation of Template:Lts(edit talk links history). Just steal the parts one wants at need. (contrast with Template:Las(edit talk links history)!!!)
4. The better resource for the kind of templates and the technology in them as you are doing is David. If it can wait, and IFF I'm around, I'm glad to help, but I'm really mostly wikimissing as have tons of summer projects around the property this year.
5. I'm off to grab my chainsaws and do some now, but please redirect my name to FrankB or so, I'm having regrets my name has become web searchable (note the interjected space above) and someone may have to be changing any references that are google searchable soon... so I'd appreciate it and would be best to sidestep the issue. Thanks.
6. If you still need me to check out the sub-templates you mentioned, or otherwise look back at stuff, leave me a specific list of "desires" and gripes, and in seven or eight hours or so, I'll check for wikimessages and have time too. Best regards (Awesome, huh? Thanks!) // FrankB 18:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

So many problems. I figure I can refer to you as your name minus the link, or just FrankB. Either way, you no longer need to worry...it is done. Now, onto business. I created a "new" page User:KuatofKDY/Sandbox for my new/next project, this family template. Of course many of the templates are out in the world already at Template:s-mar and Template:s-chi, but those are still not being used and completely editable. What you can do:

• I tested the extra little "Edit" options but none of them really worked as well as I wanted them too. I guess I need something that anchors and that may only be possible by making the header into a real header, but then the link goes on the right, not the left, and it will conflict with the "show" option. If you can play around with it, that would be fine. I give you permission to mess around in my sandbox.
• I tried the suggestions you made about getting the lines back into the template, but they didn't work. I think I need to change the entire templates basic parameters (located in my sandbox at the top of the page) but even trying that, I couldn't get any response. As the template stands, it is a no-border template, and I would like to try and get some semblance of a border back to the entire thing (except s-chi which I prefer borderless).

I think that is all I need for now. I still am not going to worry about the blank parameters until I get the mechanics of the entire template down. Then it will be time for the stealing and pilfering to make a perfect s-mar and s-chi. Everything else is looking good. Thanks FrankB!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Asking for help with template/parserFunction syntax

Hi I'm trying to understand the following codefrom the Template:Quatation can you please help me understand it by putting each component in a separate line?

{{#if:{{{2|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}}|<p style="text-align: right;"> – <cite style="font-style:normal;">{{{2}}}{{#if:{{{3|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}}|, ''{{{3}}}''}}{{#if:{{{4|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}}|, {{{4}}}}}</cite></p>}}</blockquote><noinclude><!--Markup inserted from Template:Quotation--> {{/doc}} </noinclude>

by copy-pasting it to my local wiki it does not work- I get the following text when not in edit mode on a the page into which I copied the Quotation template code from wikipedia Template:Quotation:

Template:Lorem {{#if: x|– {{{2}}}{{#if:x|, {{{3}}}}}{{#if:x|, {{{4}}}}}}}

Might you be able to point what am I missing (apart from the Lorem template)?

Thanks a lot!

Gargamel573 15:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)--

---

Ans xposted on user page... hidden by includeonly block here!

Have fun, hope that helps. When in doubt, separate the sections of the if statements with an inline comment and label! See for example Template:Tlx(edit talk links history). Best regards // FrankB 18:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It sure helps!

Thanks :)

Gargamel573 20:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)--

STICKAD

I have deleted this as a test page. Should you want to experiment, please use the sandbox, or create your own sandbox within your userspace. Thanks! J Milburn 11:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Huh? WHa??? See this and refigure (my memory is bad, but not, I think, this bad!

If "FrankB"[1] has resurfaced, or if was definitely me, please drop the content in user:Fabartus/temp (One of my MANY sandboxes) Thanks! // FrankB 17:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Although I really have no idea what you are talking about regarding FrankB resurfacing or the point of linking to Kate's tool, I see that it was originally tests by you at Template talk:X5 that were then moved into the article space by another user for some reason. All the same, a template talk page is hardly the place to test edits. J Milburn 18:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I see that that page is a sandbox- a template sandbox. Ok, it would seem my warnings were misdirected, I apologise. J Milburn 18:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

(and a quick answer on his talk inbetween)

Yeah, I knew that! <g> // FrankB 18:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 27	2 July 2007	About the Signpost

IP unwittingly predicts murder of wrestler: "Awful coincidence"	Board election series: Elections open
German chapter relaunches website, arranges government support	WikiWorld comic: "Cashew"
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 28	9 July 2007	About the Signpost

Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status	Board election series: Elections closed, results pending
Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel	Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter"	News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Problem with Template:s-hou

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

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

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

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

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

• Since you all seem to have handled all this fine, I'll just go back to sleep! <g> Cheers! // FrankB 20:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

(Xpost to Template talk:s-hou)

Oh yes, I forgot to message you back and say nevermind...um...nevermind. Thanks for the help, though. I ultimately found that I know more than I thought.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 21:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Some of us call that "Progress"! Enjoy it... makes up for the days one backslides! // FrankB 22:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 29	16 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Filling in with a new feature
Möller, Walsh retain seats; Brioschi elected	British agency cites Wikipedia in denying F1 trademark
Two new bureaucrats promoted	Wikipedian bloggers launch "article rescue" effort
Book review: The Cult of the Amateur	WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

I've restored the {{plot}} tag. The purpose of a Plot section is not to describe the entire plot; it's to give context for the rest of the article. Take a look at War and Peace, which is twice the length of a Harry Potter book and still has a much shorter synopsis. 17Drew 17:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I get your meaning, but what's there is really giving away too much already for something this young. It'll only get worse as more people catch up with the reading end of things, and I'm totally amazed this much is already up. Hence a short cryptic sense by chapters makes more sense to me so we can for a while police plot give-aways. Encyclopediac revelations and links in depth can follow. I'd rather see a whitewashed skeletal treatment for now. Chapter by chapter seems the best way to manage the editting for that for a while. This kind of detail only ruins it for the little people I'd rather encourage an appetite for literature in. Best // FrankB 18:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 30	23 July 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "World domination"	News and notes: "The Wikipedia Story", visa ruling, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Request

FrankB, long time no chat. I am asking for help once more because some of our pages have a possibly serious problem that we need mended. Currently only a few people know about it, but the potential for danger is strong. The problem I speak of is the open parameter of (example) Template:s-roy.

This is a problem because we are trying to standardize and being able to type "whatever I want to type" leads to a destandardization of policies and more recklessness of certain editors. If there is anything you can do to fix that little problem, that would be great. I have implemented the default option you told me about a month ago, and it has been working great, but it has led to this problem a bit. The number one requirement of any template edit to this or any of the other applicable templates is that it needs to be able to work with both the open pipe and no pipe options, as in the first two parameter options above; yet the fourth option must be eliminated. See what you can do, you have worked wonders before and I have no doubt you can continue to work wonders still. Thank you!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ans:

With pipe and without should be a non-starter, as {{blah}} == {{blah|}} everytime.

{lts|s-roy}} Per your request, change:

 |#default={{{1|Royal titles}}}
 to
 |#default= Royal titles 

which forces the switch's default and eliminates the optional text {{{1}}} for one all encompassing defaulted result... but be prepared to hear gripes if someone has used it for duchies, counties etc., which are after all, royalty in some historic contexts and countries.

Personally, I disagree with your 'mandate' to standardize across all circumstances, such not only makes things less flexible, but takes away editorial discretion from people volunteering their free time. Cheers // FrankB 04:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well people are allowed to add more titles and whatnot, that is not disallowed. We just are trying to stop people who are using whatever header template they choose to make a new header. Half the point of adding headers is to better be able to categorize and track who is in what, and if people are allowed to create any header they want, that ability is rather null. Thank you for the feedback and the quick reply. I will test and implement it as soon as I can. We are already coming across some interesting problems with the editable parameter, such as pages that just say sct/gb instead of Peerages of Scotland and Great Britain.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 16:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.

Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 31	30 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania
Report on Citizendium	Response: News from Citizendium
User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry	WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 32	6 August 2007	About the Signpost

Committee makes statement on U.S. chapter	About: The Wikipedia Plays
Review: The Wikipedia Plays	WikiWorld comic: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Similpedia, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)