This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eliz81 (talk | contribs) at 22:47, 24 August 2017 (→"Body discovered" parameter: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:47, 24 August 2017 by Eliz81 (talk | contribs) (→"Body discovered" parameter: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox person template. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | Template:Infobox person is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases. |
 | Biography Template‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
_-_The_Noun_Project.svg){kind=small} | Infoboxes | |||
| ||||
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | This template (Template:Infobox person) was considered for merging with Template:Infobox artist on 14 June 2014. The result of the discussion was "speedy keep". |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox person template. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
 Archives |
|
Template:Infobox actor was merged here following a discussion at Templates for discussion. The talk archives for that template are listed here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
|
Archives |
|
Template:Infobox journalist was merged here following a discussion at Templates for discussion. The talk archives for that template are listed here: 1 |
- For pending merger proposals (2009 to date) see Template talk:Infobox person/Mergers
Nationality
I apologise if I'm resurrecting an old chestnut here. I can find similar questions but no answers.
Should the nationality parameter (where not "commonly known") have a wikilink, and if so to where? I spotted an article with nationality=Lebanese (link to disambiguation page) but it's not obvious what to correct it to. The other Lebanese biographies I checked are fairly equally divided between Lebanon, Lebanese people, Lebanese nationality law and no link. I suspect we need a clean-up exercise extending beyond Lebanon, but I'd appreciate some advice from the experts rather than jumping in and making things neatly and consistently wrong. Citizenship may have similar problems, though I've not stumbled across any yet. Thanks, Certes (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Unified passing of birth and death dates
We currently have |birth_date=, which takes either {{birth date and age|YYYY|MM|DD}} if alive or {{birth date|YYYY|MM|DD}} if dead, and then also |death_date= if dead, which takes {{death date and age|YYYY|MM|DD|YYYY|MM|DD}}. We then have separately added categories for birth-year and (if dead) death-year. That's a lot of redundant passing of data! This template should be able to set the birth/death-year cats if it is passed a birthdate and/or death-date. And it shouldn't need to be passed a birth-date twice, or need different variants of a birth_date formatter used explicitly because it too is knowable according to death_date. I propose that the birth/death-date be passed in a more raw form to this template, which could then figure out how to handle it and would therefore only require things to be passed once.
As a similar example, {{Chembox}} and {{Drugbox}} used to require separately passing a unified chemical formula and a separate molecular weight value, the former having possibly variable formatting and latter being determined by unspecified external sources (even though it's just a mathematical calculation using the formula) and with varying format and level of detail. But now the raw components of the molecular formula are passed individually, which means the infobox template itself can standardize the formatting of the formula and can calculate the weight without it needing to be passed separately.
|Formula=C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>6</sub>|MolarMass=78.1121 g/mol
Became:
|C=6|H=6
DMacks (talk) 02:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
- I believe that it's because the four templates that you mention are only valid when full dates are known, and that those dates are in the Gregorian calendar. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
- True, but it's likewise true in the chem/drug sets. There are times we need to hardcode formulas and/or masses because they require formatting or details that cannot be expressed simply or have a some other non-canonical value. So we retain old fields, but use new for simplicity when reasonable. And passing the raw values (whichever ones are known) would make it easier have standardized formatting when not all are known. For example, if only a birth-year is known, age can be known to ±1 year, which can be calculated. DMacks (talk) 14:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'd like to see an improvement if it can be done without breaking partially known dates, dmy/mdy format, etc. It could also solve the problem of well-meaning editors adding "(aged 42)" etc. manually and not returning to update it on the subject's birthday. Certes (talk) 17:44, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Not birth name but full name (especially for adoptees)
I wanted to add the full name "Stephen Edward Hewlett" to the infobox for Steve Hewlett (journalist). Usually one would use "Birth_name". But he was adopted by a couple with surname Hewlett so this was not his birth name. I've used "Other names" but this seems a bit clunky, especially as it's plural. I suggest that there should be a parameter "Full_name" or similar for cases like this. Or even just "Other_name", singular? Any thoughts? This can't be a unique case, I'm sure. PamD 10:50, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Just out of curiosity, why do you think it's important to have the subject's full name in the infobox when it's there in bold in the first sentence of the article? RivertorchWATER 14:06, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hmm, good question. I'm more often arguing the other way, that everything in the info box ought to be included (and sourced) in the text of the article. I suppose it just seems the sort of thing I'd expect to see in an infobox. Isn't that why there's a "Birth_name" field? PamD 18:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
She is not a former Muslim
There is a wide agreement among the Muslim scholars that Alawite people are not part of Islam at all. This is encompasses the Alawite faith and ideology. Alawite faith is no way part of Islam. Furthermore, Alawite people do not practice Islam as the vast majority of Muslims. However, the poor Arabic of Wafa Sultan is very obvious to the extent that she has no minimum capacity in the Arabic language which makes every argument, that she puts forward against Islam, exposed to mockery! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.200.33.177 (talk) 11:00, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Does this look like the talk page for the Wafa Sultan article? Ian.thomson (talk) 13:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
"Body discovered" parameter
I appreciate standardized metadata as much as the next person, but is it really necessary to display all the death info in the person template? By all accounts, Kim Wall was an interesting and important journalist, but with her bio as short as it is, seeing the highlighted info about when and where her body discovered is kind of sickening. It's a shame her article was only created after her dissppearance (I think there's a good chance she would've been notable before that) but her life should not be reduced to this. It would make more sense to display this parameter in an article specifically about her death or disappearance. ~Eliz81 22:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Category: