User talk:Izkala: Difference between revisions

Archives

No archives yet.

Hey. When you're looking for something entirely different to do, take a look a the different templates employed for this family of articles: Template:World records in swimming. The templates are a complete mess, with various built-in dynamic field functions. There should be one template, well-designed, that works well for all of these articles. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point to some of them? Are you referring to the tables? Alakzi (talk) 14:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:swimmingrecord
• Template:Swimmingrecordrelay
• Template:Swimmingrecordlisttop
• Template:Swimmingrecordlegend

Just for fun, some of these articles use the templates, some use wikitables, and some use a mix on the same page. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I did take a look at these, but the conversion is quite tedious, so I've been putting it off. Alakzi (talk) 12:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me: I know they're a mess. I didn't expect you to jump in and fix them, or create a simplified replacement overnight. I really wanted you to get a feel for what a mess they are, identify the specific problems, start contemplating ideas for how to replace them with a more logical, simplified replacement, and then discuss. Whatever we do, it's going to require a lot of manual editing to replace the existing templates (and wiki tables where used), so I want to get your best answer on the first attempt. You're not a sports guy, but you are organized and logical, so you're a good guinea pig to see if the replacement is easily intelligible to general readers, not swimming/sports fans. Of course, I am also looking for the most elegant coding solution, too.

These templates originally had a dynamic field built into them for the swim meet locations that (a) forced you to use the three-character country codes, (b) rendered a flag icon and linked country name for every location contrary to several MOS provisions (I mean, how many times does the United States need to be linked in the same article?), and (c) rendered an ugly display error if you left the location fields blank or tried to replace the country code in favor of linked or unlinked text. Earlier, I had Frietjes perform some surgery on them just to get rid of the redundant flag icons for meet locations.

As far as I know, there are a maximum of 21 world record progression articles for specific swimming events which should be using these templates. There may be, however, other uses of the templates of which I am unaware -- I need to check the template transclusions counter. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Are there particular aspects of {{Swimmingrecord}} you're dissatisfied with? The reason we're stuck with a parameter for every tiny thing is for column sorting to work properly. I could investigate whether some parameters could be shed or combined for ease of use. The repetition of flags and wikilinks is unfortunate, but we could probably tolerate that in a table. The templates are also used in athlete articles, where some columns are hidden - see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Swimmingrecord. Alakzi (talk) 14:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that raises a very good question: Do these records need to be sortable? They are already in chronological order, and record times are descending. If a reader wants to find a particular swimmer, they can do that faster with their browser's keyword search function -- the date sort function only sorts to the series beginning in chronological order or the series ending in reverse chronological order; likewise the last name sort function only sorts to names beginning with A in alphabetical order, or to names beginning with Z in reverse alphabetical order. Sorting by swim meet location or event (presumably in alpha or reverse alpha order) is also not terribly useful, either. As the title suggests, these tables are most useful to illustrate the progression of the declining times of new world records over the last 90 to 100 years. I say we ditch the sortability functions for every data column -- would that simplify your possible coding solutions? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If we ditch sorting, there's hardly any reason for these templates to exist - that is, beyond enforcing a set number of columns. I agree that we probably don't need all of the sorting possibilities of {{Swimmingrecord}}, but I imagine that's something you're gonna want to discuss with contributors to swimming lists. If it takes so much effort to accomplish something so primitive, it might be better to look for alternatives. Alakzi (talk) 15:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the templates do provide (1) a structure and (2) a measure of uniformity, which is not unimportant. The template creator has not edited in three years, and the current biggest consumer is a German editor who is grinding out incomplete national record sets for African countries (the least competitive region in world swimming). But my new favorite is the List of Burmese national records in swimming, which -- surprise! -- has a Myanmar/Burmese flag for every Burmese national record in swimming. LOL Given that something like 400 articles appear to be using these templates, ditching them and starting over does not seem to be a realistic option, inasmuch as every article includes multiple uses of the templates. I'm going to think on this some more; when you get bored with whatever else your working on, contemplate your ideal template solution (minus the unnecessary sort functions) for these tables. I can see now why someone just gave up and formatted several of the world record progression articles with wikitable coding: it was simpler. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alakzi. I am here to not only thank you for your effort to help, but apologize for two things: snapping your head off (unnecessarily), and taking so long to come over and apologize.

I recognize and appreciate that your intervention there was not only well meaning and well intended, but also that you had thoroughly investigated and accurately reported what happened. But instead of thanking you for that, I bit your head off, and for that I am sincerely sorry. The reason I've taken so long to respond is that I did not want to re-stir the pot because I was still holding out hope that just once, if others would stay out of the matter, Ched and I could get to the bottom of it ourselves and that then the behavior would stop. I see today that is not going to happen, and regret that my apology to you is long overdue.

I can see how trying to help and having your head bitten off was/is very painful and discouraging; I am so sorry for that.

Here is how I might have better handled that situation and what my response coulda/shoulda been:

• Thank you, Alakzi, for taking the time and good-faith effort to investigate the situation and come over here to try to help smooth ruffled feathers and advance understanding. The problem, though, is that these specific behaviors, demonstrated so clearly in this example, have been going on now for years, and you can't be aware of the full background. Ched and Co. follow me to areas in which I work and where they don't even evidence familiarity with the processes, only to dig up an old grudge they bear, and to comment on the contributor rather than content no matter that I don't do that and no matter what I say or how right I may be about the content matter.

  Because it has been seemingly impossible to get this behavior to stop, if you don't mind, it might be helpful at this point if other editors would stay out and let Ched and me try to resolve it ourselves. I think that past intervention of other editors has prevented Ched from owning and addressing the issue. Thank you again for trying, but I'd rather hear from Ched this time, because this has gone on for much too long, and when others intercede, it seems he is never held accountable.

So, that is what I could have said that would have gotten the same message across without being so hurtful to you. I am so sorry, and hope you are not discouraged as a result of this dreadful experience, at my hands. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Sandy, I appreciate this a lot. I'm sorry to hear that you've not been able to resolve your differences with Ched for so long, and I'm sorry for not realising the true extent of the dispute. Alakzi (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for the gracious acceptance of my apology. I am a bit of a Pollyanna at heart and never give up hope that differences can be resolved, and that leads to even more discomfort when they are not. I suspect-- given your attempts to help-- you have a good bit of that in your character as well, and I know how this incident must have hurt. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should check my spelling before changing templates. I screwed up, I'm sorry. TrueCRaysball | ^#RaysUp 00:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologise, True - we all make mistakes. Have a good evening. Alakzi (talk) 00:39, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alakzi. You removed the IETF language tag I had added to Template:Infobox language. I added the tag so a code could be added for articles such as Austrian German. Austrian German can only be identified by its IETF language tag de-AT. It has no ISO language code of its own, being the national variety of the German language (ISO 639 de) that is used in Austria (ISO 3166-1 AT). The corresponding article on the German wikipedia, Österreichisches Deutsch, shows the IETF language tag in the infobox.

Other articles that would benefit from the IETF language tag include American English, Canadian French, or Swiss Standard German, Brazilian Portuguese. All these articles on language varieties currently lack their language code, even though that code – the IETF language tags en-US, fr-CA, and pt-BR respectively – exists and is being used by countless people. I think all these articles would greatly benefit if the language infobox showed their code. I intend to add it again (unless you convince me otherwise). --mach 🙈🙉🙊 00:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mach. I'm sceptical about the IETF language tag being a key fact, but if nobody else objects, I won't either. Thanks for the explanation. Alakzi (talk) 01:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is any of the codes a key fact? In any case, I have taken the discussion to Template talk:Infobox language#IETF language_tag so others may voice their objections, if any. I apologize I didn’t do so in the first place. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 01:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you slap a friendly "welcome to Wikipedia" template on this guy's talk page: User talk:Vlmh? He's made a handful of edits since late 2014, and I just had to revert several with an explanation on his talk page. It would be nice if someone left a non-corrective message for him. If we treat the newbies right, we may catch a couple of keepers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course; I've offered them some cookies biscuits. ;-) Alakzi (talk) 02:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- all is happy in the valley. We might even get a convert out of him -- WP:SWIMMING needs to replenish its ranks. I hate when the first communication with a newbie is a corrective message; that can be a real turnoff for potentially productive new editors. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:00, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 April 27#Template:Inherit the Wind, I thought you had considered the page move. However, it seems that there are now a bunch of page moves and template alterations based on a different interpretation of the results.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony. No, I did not take into account alternative outcomes. Any such move or alternation is not supported by my closure nor is it prevented by it. Alakzi (talk) 16:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than faffing around with individual edit requests for each one, can you make that same edit from <tt>...</tt> into {{mono}} on:

• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Account creator
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/File mover
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Template editor (two on here)
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer (two here as well)

Thanks! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 18:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done - thanks for digging these up. Alakzi (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of blindly hitting the Revert button, why didn't you actually look at the edit? If you notice, there was already a mixture of [[Xxx railway station|Xxx]] and {{stnlnk|Xxx}} in the body of the article. Also, the WP:RDT was renamed (from a redirect) and moved to the standard position in station articles (immediately following the Infobox). And let’s not get started on {{IERail start}}. Besides the obvious that it should be merged into the standard {{S-line}} — now there’s something useful for you to do — hard-coded colour values were replaced with calls to {{IrishRail Color}}.
And just for good measure, so nobody can say that I didn’t give fair warning:
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Athenry railway station.
Useddenim (talk) 14:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Also replaced <small>…</small> with {{small|…}} in the succession box. Useddenim (talk) 14:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Useddenim. I did look at your edit; I did not object to those other changes, so you could've reinstated them. Don't post bogus template-d warnings on my talk page, even if you're going to strike them out. Alakzi (talk) 14:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

read the names in template documentation, they are copied from Shia template and these names are Wrong..that's it! Stop protecting an incorrectly prepared template 68.100.166.227 (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Alakzi (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is NOT a denomination but theology school!! It's incorrectly placed.. Then where are Maturidi & Mu'tazili? Murji'ah is something like Mu'tazili, Maturidi, and Ash'ari. 68.100.166.227 (talk) 22:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've practically got no knowledge of Islam; the first I touched the template was when I responded to your edit request, which concerned a technical aspect of it. Please contact somebody who edits Islam articles regularly. Looking at the page history, Dougweller might be able to help. Alakzi (talk) 22:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This switch is missing:

<!--NEEDS the following <includeonly>{{Sidebar with collapsible lists | name = Islam | bodyclass = collapsible {{#if:{{{collapsed|}}}|collapsed}} | titlestyle = font-size:88%; line-height:200%; | title = [[File:Basmala.svg|200px|Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim]] {{resize|115%|{{nobold|Part of [[:Category:Islam|a series]] on [[Islam]]}}}} <br />{{resize|165%|[[Islam]]}} --> 68.100.166.227 (talk) 22:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It defaults to collapsed; you can use {{Islam|expanded=all}} to the same effect. Alakzi (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But the following form <!-- {{Islam|collapsed=1}} --> is not working.. All template should collapse if you introduce the following: <!-- <includeonly>{{Sidebar with collapsible lists | name = Islam | bodyclass = collapsible {{#if:{{{collapsed|}}}|collapsed}} | titlestyle = font-size:88%; line-height:200%; | title = [[File:Basmala.svg|200px|Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim]] {{resize|115%|{{nobold|Part of [[:Category:Islam|a series]] on [[Islam]]}}}} --> on top Like Sunnni, Shia, Ismaili templates. 68.100.166.227 (talk) 22:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but if I do what you ask, the template will default to expanded, which other people might object to. Alakzi (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• No that's not right, you can compare with Sunnni Islam, Shia Islam, Ismailism, and Druze Templates They work well

68.100.166.227 (talk) 22:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, it's a separate setting to collapse the sidebar in its entirety. Unfortunately, I'd have to move the headline below the title and alter the style in various other ways for it to work - which I don't really feel like doing right now. If you make these changes in the sandbox, I'll take a look. Alakzi (talk) 22:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{Sunni Islam|collapsed=1}} {{Shia Islam|collapsed=1}} {{Ismailism|collapsed=1}} {{Druze|collapsed=1}} {{Alevism|collapsed=1}}

See it works fine 68.100.166.227 (talk) 23:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following should work well in your template:Islam, sand box too does not allow any changes..So I put it here for your trial

68.100.166.227 (talk) 00:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but is there any actual need for this? I don't see the benefit in obscuring the sidebar almost completely. Alakzi (talk) 01:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: First, Some of the old articles had this template placed in collapsed=1-frorm because of the topic Islam was of secondary importance, and second reason: some of the articles are too short it occupies a lot of space if you put in the current form. i.e. the hide-switch is necessary..68.100.166.227 (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you look at the page List of extinct Shia sects. There are 2 templates of secondary importance in collapsed-form since the page does not have enough space..

Nobody had answered my inquiry about Murji'ah, yet.68.100.166.227 (talk) 17:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another example about the collapsed-form is here. 68.100.166.227 (talk) 18:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Chinese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 10:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain how did you judge the TfD to be complete for the Multihull and Trimaran templates? It appears there was significant resistance to the idea of removing them and only one person vocally against their existence. A lot of my hard work is now deleted, I am truly saddened and demotivated. prat (talk) 15:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Prat, the idea is to convert your navbox to a list in article space, thereby preserving your work in a different and more appropriate format. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, your single voice is getting tiring in that echo-chamber, and you clearly have no idea about the topic area. Why don't you stick to your 1000s of other articles instead of deleting people's hard work? It destroys the community and the spirit of Wikipedia. Have fun with your deletion spree, I quit editing in protest. prat (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was sufficient and justified opposition to the over-broad infobox to merit its conversion to a list. Your work is not lost; it can be found in the new list and the template history. I'd be happy to help with the creation of navboxes with a narrower scope; however, people hadn't been receiving to your suggestions at the TfD, so I couldn't have reasonably closed it as a split. I hope this helps. Alakzi (talk) 16:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds a lot like an unwarranted judgement call with basically no evidence to me, followed by an edit rampage. Anyway, I have no time for this crap anymore. Do you have any idea how much of a hassle it will be to re-add all that stuff you removed to every damn multihull and trimaran page??? As if I am going to bother with that muck after going through a damn deletion review! Have fun mucking with other people's hard work and contributions, the reality is your recent uncalled for actions have ensured frequent and numerous real contributions have now been lost. This community is destroying itself due to the actions of people like you. FEEL PROUD. prat (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pratyeka: There's little point moaning here; if you're not happy with the close, raise the matter at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox tornado}} is now ready for substitution. I can run AWB, but not write code. If you'd like to supply me with the necessary, and some instructions, I can do the job; or feel free to do so yourself ;-) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise {{Infobox tornado outbreak}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done both, except for userspace transclusions. Alakzi (talk) 19:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Also {{Infobox Canadian school district}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And {{Infobox education in Canada}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Education in Canada has got 1,650 transclusions; I'll do district. Alakzi (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Andy: We're missing |additionalname= - was that intentional? Alakzi (talk) 13:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some fixes for {{Infobox storm}} are needed, as shown at Category:Convert invalid options which currently lists 21 articles which look as if they have a problem with the change. Take this edit for example. That changed the first of the following lines to the second:

|wind = 121 mph (194 km/h)<br /><small>(at [[Kelly Air Force Base]])</small>
| highest winds = 121 mph (194 km/h)<br /><small>(at [[Kelly Air Force Base]])</small>

The problem is that the old infobox allowed free-form text, but the new infobox requires a number representing the speed in km/h and nothing else (because the number is passed to {{convert}}). I could fix them, but I would omit the extra information—perhaps someone with knowledge of the topic should take a look and decide what should be done. I'm reporting this here because you might know the background about the change, and could let the people involved know. Otherwise, I guess I should mention it at WT:SEVERE. Johnuniq (talk) 06:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnuniq: I've cough "fixed" it with this until we can think of something better. By the way, I did not make the infobox conversion. Alakzi (talk) 10:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, I know you're not responsible for the syntax rules for templates either, but seeing stuff like that reminds me why Lua is better! Thanks—I did a purge to empty the convert error category which keeps me happy. I'll post at the wikiproject to let people know that edits are needed. Johnuniq (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• {{Infobox Country Pan American Games}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That was done, but we have an edit-warrior there, who thinks their project owns the template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• {{Infobox Country at the Universiade}}; but what's the problem at Turkey at the 2011 Winter Universiade? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It fails on attempting to calculate the sum of blank parameters. Alakzi (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can that be fixed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fixed with this edit. Alakzi (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• {{Infobox Country Asian Para Games}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• {{Infobox Country All-Africa Games}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • All templates should not be merged until all issues are worked out first. Is this too hard to ask for? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's very hard to work out all the issues, when someone keeps reverting to the deprecated version of the tempaltes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can we keep this conversation in one place? I've visited four different user talk pages. Alakzi (talk) 19:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • You've missed a few... :-( Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Upon further investigation, these infoboxes are not quite ready for substitution. In the unlikely scenario that I become motivated, I'll untangle the code of {{Infobox country at games}}. But the more I see, the more I shake my head in disbelief. Alakzi (talk) 22:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Why not? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • The parameters don't match one-to-one and we're missing a couple, as in the case of American games. For example, the American games |website= is used as follows: [http://{{{website}}}/ {{{website}}}]; it would probably best be converted to {{{{|safesubst:}}}#if:{{{website|}}}|{{URL|{{{website|}}}}}}}.
                • Please be more specific. Which parameters are missing, from where? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I retract that; I've taken another look, and, though seven parameters hadn't been copied in Special:Diff/663827330, they're either redundant to existing ones or plain useless. (However, we should probably accommodate |PAGappearances= in some manner.) Besides |website=, the only other thing that needs to be catered for is the location switch. Alakzi (talk) 12:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                    • OK, I think I've taken care of the aforementioned parameters, and apologies for jumping the gun earlier. Can you confirm by substituting a couple of the Pan American Games infoboxes? Alakzi (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                    • @Sportsfan 1234: You too. Alakzi (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                      • @Andy: I've added some finishing touches to the other two as well, so I'll go ahead with substituting them. Alakzi (talk) 21:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • There must've been a reason I didn't add it back then, but I don't remember what that was. Maybe I should take notes. Alakzi (talk) 21:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Expression error: Unrecognized word "g". I get this when I input flagbearer. Competitors, flagbearer and medals still do not link to the respective articles. Finally the summary is not shown beside Pan American Games appearances. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where does this occur? Alakzi (talk) 23:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • On the flagbearer option. I tried this on this article. Also is it possible to bold the IOC code, and remove the brackets for the in sports. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • It works for me. You might've been trying it with |gold=. Yes, it is possible. Alakzi (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry it works for me now as well. When do you think you can get the other cosmetic fixes done? Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Sportsfan 1234: Which other ones? In the meantime, I've put the summary links back. Alakzi (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linking the three items from above. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've done medals, but, as I've said elsewhere, I don't believe the other two to be necessary. Alakzi (talk) 03:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Olympic Infobox connects to both, so should these events. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add the flag bearer link if there are no objections, but the competitors category link is taking too far; the infobox is fast becoming a link soup. @Dirtlawyer1: Thoughts on this? Alakzi (talk) 03:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are the specific questions, Alakzi? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dirtlawyer1: In converting {{Infobox Country Pan American Games}} to use {{Infobox country at games}}, I've got rid of the competitors category and flag bearer links. To illustrate:

Before	After
Argentina at the Pan American Games Flag of Argentina IOC code  ARG NOC Comité Olímpico Argentino [es] At the 2011 Pan American Games in Guadalajara Competitors 486 in 37 sports Flag bearer Walter Pérez Medals Rank: 7 Gold 21 Silver 19 Bronze 35 Total 75 Pan American Games history (summary) Appearances 1951 1955 1959 1963 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015	Sporting event delegation Argentina at the 2011 Pan American Games IOC code ARG NOC Comité Olímpico Argentino [es] in Guadalajara 14–30 October 2011 Competitors 486 in 37 sports Flag bearer Walter Pérez Medals Ranked 7th Gold 21 Silver 19 Bronze 35 Total 75 Pan American Games appearances (overview) 1951 1955 1959 1963 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015 2019 2023

Which do you prefer? Alakzi (talk) 10:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the second for several reasons: (1) the two-line header looks better ("the" may be unnecessary in header); (2) labeling the flag with a caption is unnecessary; (3) the data field label links are unnecessary (you can probably ditch the "medals" label link, too); (4) the dates of the event is a good addition; (5) "Appearances" label is redundant; (6) no reason to state the names of the games twice (that's the purpose of the infobox header).

Other suggestions: (1) "Summary" does not need to be italicized; (2) I think "history" is better than "appearances," and it's shorter; (3) the games location should probably include the country as well as the city; (4) define the exterior boundary of the medals table with the same tool line used as its internal divider; (5) the medals table might look better if only the number cells were colored.

That's a really big flag -- not quite sure what to do with it from a design standpoint. There's got to be a better, less ostentatious way to use the national flag in these infoboxes. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dirtlawyer1. (1) I've removed the italics. (2) I think that "appearances" is less ambiguous; "history" might be confused with the history of the games. (3) Don't we usually refer to games only by their city? Somewhat unintuitively, the link points to the games article, where the country is specified. I'll give (4) and (5) some thought. I agree about the flag; I'll see if there's anything that can be done. Alakzi (talk) 12:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should in be inserted before the city? Also you never addressed why the Olympics infobox is allowed to link to competitors and flagbearers, while this one cannot. They link to these articles for a reason, because it lists all the countries in one page (something you cannot do while just on one country page). Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain?? Also the medals don't show, unless you add them. Before they automatically showed. Can you make it like that please? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No defaults for variable information for obvious reasons; if you want it to say "0", type in "0". Alakzi (talk) 11:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are not answering my question. "Why is the Olympics infobox is allowed to link to competitors and flagbearers, while this one cannot." Its the same situation with the 0's. They automatically should appear, just like in the Olympic infobox. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:17, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Olympics infobox is not the gold standard in infobox design. I've said elsewhere that the infobox is in risk of becoming a link soup. Further, we do not link to categories if it can be helped; if a list of competitors is desired, do create a list article. The counts should not default to 0, as someone might simply forget to fill them in, or the games might be in the future, etc. It is rudimentary quality control. Alakzi (talk) 14:29, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand the category, but not the flagbearer link being removed. This links specifically to the games in question (unlike the categories, just like the medal table). Second no one will forget to fill them in. There are some countries that didn't win medals and now that won't reflect in the infobox. If a country does win a medal it will show, when filled in. Please fix this or I will have to revert. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:49, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix the articles in due time. Alakzi (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are 1000's of articles across the multiple games. By putting back the zeroes automatically the problem is fixed. So please add that back along with the link to the flagbearers. Also why have you not edited the Olympic infobox, if its not the gold standard? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed here. They'll all have the zeros in the article when they're eventually substituted, but I won't be incorporating this behaviour in {{Infobox country at games}}. Alakzi (talk) 16:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to add the flagbearer link, which you have not provided a valid reason for excluding. So please stop removing it. For some reason when I add it, two flagbearers show up on the infobox. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Three of us have said no to this link, and I've also provided an explanation for reverting you just now. Restoring a broken version of the template is not OK. Alakzi (talk) 15:54, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How the fuck is it not okay, when the same fucking behaviour happens in the Olympics infobox. The article FUCKING exists. Open your damn eyes. The 2015 Pan American Games national flag bearers exists and so does 2011 Pan American Games national flag bearers and so forth. Also there is a random grey line going through the medals (gold, silver and bronze) which should be removed.

• {{Infobox nhsc}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was already a wrapper of this one in the sandbox. What are the new year/event parameters for? Alakzi (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I just copied them from the original (parameter number 17 & 19). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you converted the {{Infobox Greek Dimos}} into a wrapper for Infobox settlement. I noticed some issues:

• pop_community and area_community aren't displayed. I tried to find a quick workaround, but Infobox settlement doesn't support a third population_blank field.
• a map box (show/hide) is shown below the pushpin map, also if the image_map field is empty Solved this one myself, see Template:Infobox Greek Dimos/testcases

See Askos, Sochos and Lagyna for example. Do you have ideas how to fix this? Markussep ^Talk 15:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is the community population (and area) not mutually exclusive to the municipal unit's? Presumably, no article uses both. Alakzi (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A community is a subdivision of a municipal unit. If they have the same name, which is the case for Lachanas, Assiros, Aiani, Ptolemaida, Gargalianoi, Filiatra and many more, the articles give data for both administrative units. Markussep ^Talk 18:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know that it's its subdivision, but I'd not considered the possibility that we'd be presenting both in the same article. It might be better to revert to an earlier version; I've not got time to look into this now. Alakzi (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I made a temporary fix, (mis)using the demographics fields, but I think the nicest way would be adding population_blank3 and area_blank3 fields to Infobox settlement. I don't think I can edit the (sandbox of) Infobox settlement without creating a total mess, maybe I'll post something on the talk page about this problem. Markussep ^Talk 11:05, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Countries_in_Europe (Kosovo is listed here). You removed the Category from Northern Cyprus by saying "Upon further inspection, disputed territories do not use any of the country categories, so I'm removing all of them". Is Kosovo not disputed acc. to you? Did you miss Kosovo during your inspection?Ayka3b (talk) 19:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did not; Kosovo is not in that category. Alakzi (talk) 19:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hımmm, Ohh I see now. "Category:Kosovo" is in "Category:Countries in Europe", but "Kosovo" is not in "Category:Countries in Europe". So, do you have any objection to "Category:Northern Cyprus" to be in "Category:Countries in Europe"? If not, I wanna put it there just as Kosovo's example. Sorry, for my misunderstanding. Without clicking "Category:Kosovo" in "Category:Countries in Europe", I did not notice that "Kosovo" is not really there.Ayka3b (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As you please. Alakzi (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you closed Template:Scott Rudin, Template:Brian Grazer and Template:Damon Lindelof as no consensus? They seemed to have consensus to keep.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did not feel that a (rough) consensus had been established, as (a) the nomination rationale had not been effectively rebutted, (b) the !votes did not appear to be especially informed (for example, nobody made any mention of WP:NAVBOX or the criteria therein), and (c) many of the !votes were - simply put - nods in agreement. Alakzi (talk) 16:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, A. At your leisure, can you code the WP:Swimming talk page so that it auto-archives anything older than 12 month? It's long overdue: there are discussion threads from 2009 on the talk page. Also, is a single archive adequate, or should it be segmented in some fashion? I'm sure it's easy to do, but I'm always afraid that I will throw a spanner in the works and damage or lose something that can't be fixed or recovered. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Alakzi (talk) 16:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in fact, they are. There's even a template for it. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Which is? Alakzi (talk) 18:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the "address" for it at the moment - and since I'm typing on my phone right now I won't be looking it up until much later today. But it does exist - I've seen it used numerous times over the last three years I've been here. You're welcome to look it up, of course. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is one (two, actually) for AfD, but I do not believe that it's customary to template IPs and apparent SPAs elsewhere. This approach is generally unproductive and many will argue that it runs afoul of WP:AGF. Besides, all the IP said was "Support", so we'd not have taken them very seriously even if they'd been a registered user. Alakzi (talk) 19:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it runs afoul of AGF when used appropriately (as in this situation). Personally, I've seen it used at AN, AN/I, and in several other talk page discussion situations where consensus is bring sought. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WV: Is this one of those where you say "per MOS" but then claim "but I don't know where"...you don't seem to be that knowledgeable about what policy and guidelines really do exist, and in some cases insist there is one just because you want it to be so. I saw your post asking at BLP about "Biography" sections...despite other users saying nothing says yes or no on the subject. You really waste a lot of people's time by saying "it is so" when if you knew MOS and guidelines better, you'd stop making such claims. JackTheVicar (talk) 21:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there is some linguistic confusion here. The article is a biography, in the sense that it is about a person; however, the homonymous section within the biography has got a slightly different meaning - that of a chronological narrative of their life. Though it cannot be said that a "Biography" section within a biography is redundant, a better term for it could be found. Alakzi (talk) 22:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You are correct, Alakzi: a better term could - and should - be found -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alakzi : The problem is that there isn't a great option that meets 100% of the needs. I've weighed between "Biography" and "Life" which are the terms generally used in these Bio articles and lean towards "Biography" because I don't think "Life" is accurate or precise enough and it doesn't have the complete etymological/philological meaning I seek. Biography isn't perfect, but I tend toward it only as the less bad option among several not-great options. I just know I can't stand disorganized biographies that aren't in one well-delineated section. If I better word that is more all-encompassing and precise it out there, I as a writer and lover of words have yet to find it. If someone suggests something better than Biography or the lesser word Life, I'd be open to it. JackTheVicar (talk) 22:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• winklevi ...Alakzi is entirely correct on the collapsing note issue, its that you just hate to be wrong or have someone not see it your way only. JackTheVicar (talk) 19:09, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Having you been stalking me again? Bad dog. Bad. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

haha, I'd noticed his message on your talk page before turning in for the night. Alakzi (talk) 14:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He has a history of over-the-top rhetoric and discussion meltdowns. First time I've been on the receiving end. I made the mistake of calling him out; now, I'll have to live with it. The whole thing about trying to invalidate a blocked user's discussion !vote is rather ironic; he was blocked in 2011 for running a string of a half dozen sock puppets in various discussions, pretty sophisticated about it, too, from what I've read in the SPI comments. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]