| Revision as of 06:46, 5 November 2005 editJosh Grosse (talk | contribs)8,857 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:17, 5 November 2005 edit undoEugene van der Pijll (talk | contribs)37,383 edits →Suggested parametersNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| **The "section" rank should have been entered in Latin, so it should have been 'Sectio'. (The sectio templates already existed). I don't think the section and series ranks were added in the right place. At least on the page ], both ranks are above the Families. | **The "section" rank should have been entered in Latin, so it should have been 'Sectio'. (The sectio templates already existed). I don't think the section and series ranks were added in the right place. At least on the page ], both ranks are above the Families. | ||
| *** Thanks for that, but you lost me in the last sentence there. On ], ''Banksia'' is a genus, and sections and series are subgeneric taxa, just as in the taxobox. ] | ] 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | *** Thanks for that, but you lost me in the last sentence there. On ], ''Banksia'' is a genus, and sections and series are subgeneric taxa, just as in the taxobox. ] | ] 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| **** You're right, they are. I misremembered. However, you inserted them at the bottom of the template, below the subspecies level. ] 10:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ** Your addition of the diversity and synonym templates inserted more whitespace in taxoboxes not containing these templates. I've tried to remove the whitespace, with horrible effects on ]... As that is so far the only page using a new taxobox with these templates, I've subst'ed the taxobox, and repaired it manually. I hope someone knowledgeable in the arcane templating arts can debug the template... ] 17:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC) | ** Your addition of the diversity and synonym templates inserted more whitespace in taxoboxes not containing these templates. I've tried to remove the whitespace, with horrible effects on ]... As that is so far the only page using a new taxobox with these templates, I've subst'ed the taxobox, and repaired it manually. I hope someone knowledgeable in the arcane templating arts can debug the template... ] 17:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *** I confess the whitespace was indeed introduced by me, but this was in an attempt to fix the taxobox at ], which was showing the same horrible effects you saw at ], even though it does not use either of the new parameters. Your fix has destroyed the taxobox at ] once again. I'm going to revert your change. I acknowledge that the whitespace is a problem, but until we can find someone "knowledgeable in the arcane templateing arts" to address this problem properly, extra whitespace is preferable to some boxes not working at all. ] | ] 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | *** I confess the whitespace was indeed introduced by me, but this was in an attempt to fix the taxobox at ], which was showing the same horrible effects you saw at ], even though it does not use either of the new parameters. Your fix has destroyed the taxobox at ] once again. I'm going to revert your change. I acknowledge that the whitespace is a problem, but until we can find someone "knowledgeable in the arcane templateing arts" to address this problem properly, extra whitespace is preferable to some boxes not working at all. ] | ] 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| **** Yes, but I thought only ] was broken, and I had subst'ed that template out. Anyway, it's been solved now, thanks to Josh. ] 10:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Whitespace problem== | ==Whitespace problem== | ||
Revision as of 10:17, 5 November 2005
About this template
The implementation of this template is scarier than its usage. For one example of how to use it see the the edit page of Orca - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Orca&action=edit. Most parameters are optional, so if a particular entry is not relevant for your case, just leave it out. See the taxobox usage for an explanation.
Suggested parameters
Great work bringing on the new template!... but there are still a couple of parameters missing.
Firstly, I need to be able to specify taxa at "Section" and "Series" rank. See Taxonomy of Banksia for evidence of a number of non-existent species articles, for which these ranks will be needed when I get around to writing them.
Secondly, the "Diversity" option was very useful. I used it at Banksia to state the number of species, since the subdivision was at subgenus rank. It is also very useful for higher taxa such as families and orders.
Thirdly, the "Synonyms" option was also useful, and should be included here.
Snottygobble | Talk 23:58, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
- Diversity option done. Snottygobble | Talk 23:40, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- Section, Series and Synonyms options done. Snottygobble | Talk 00:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- The "section" rank should have been entered in Latin, so it should have been 'Sectio'. (The sectio templates already existed). I don't think the section and series ranks were added in the right place. At least on the page Taxonomy of Banksia, both ranks are above the Families.
- Thanks for that, but you lost me in the last sentence there. On Taxonomy of Banksia, Banksia is a genus, and sections and series are subgeneric taxa, just as in the taxobox. Snottygobble | Talk 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- You're right, they are. I misremembered. However, you inserted them at the bottom of the template, below the subspecies level. Eugene van der Pijll 10:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, but you lost me in the last sentence there. On Taxonomy of Banksia, Banksia is a genus, and sections and series are subgeneric taxa, just as in the taxobox. Snottygobble | Talk 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- The "section" rank should have been entered in Latin, so it should have been 'Sectio'. (The sectio templates already existed). I don't think the section and series ranks were added in the right place. At least on the page Taxonomy of Banksia, both ranks are above the Families.
- Your addition of the diversity and synonym templates inserted more whitespace in taxoboxes not containing these templates. I've tried to remove the whitespace, with horrible effects on Banksia... As that is so far the only page using a new taxobox with these templates, I've subst'ed the taxobox, and repaired it manually. I hope someone knowledgeable in the arcane templating arts can debug the template... Eugene van der Pijll 17:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- I confess the whitespace was indeed introduced by me, but this was in an attempt to fix the taxobox at Jarrah, which was showing the same horrible effects you saw at Banksia, even though it does not use either of the new parameters. Your fix has destroyed the taxobox at Jarrah once again. I'm going to revert your change. I acknowledge that the whitespace is a problem, but until we can find someone "knowledgeable in the arcane templateing arts" to address this problem properly, extra whitespace is preferable to some boxes not working at all. Snottygobble | Talk 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- Your addition of the diversity and synonym templates inserted more whitespace in taxoboxes not containing these templates. I've tried to remove the whitespace, with horrible effects on Banksia... As that is so far the only page using a new taxobox with these templates, I've subst'ed the taxobox, and repaired it manually. I hope someone knowledgeable in the arcane templating arts can debug the template... Eugene van der Pijll 17:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, but I thought only Banksia was broken, and I had subst'ed that template out. Anyway, it's been solved now, thanks to Josh. Eugene van der Pijll 10:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Whitespace problem
Can somebody who understands templates fix it to remove the unattractive extra whitespace please? The most obvious and simple fix utterly destroys the taxoboxes at Jarrah and Banksia, so please take these pages into account when fixing. Snottygobble | Talk 05:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
I've fixed the problem by including empty comments at the start of each footer template. Josh