Template talk:Height

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Created for sports articles, to indicate how tall a player is.

Next generation co-template Htcm[edit]

I am creating the related fast co-template {{htcm}}, for centimetres, as 4x times faster than {{height}} and with the same options, for abbr=no or wiki=yes or precision=3, but also allowing some parameters of {{convert}}, such as 'lk=on' or 'abbr=off' as a co-template of Template:Convert which could be used for rare, custom formatting. Currently, {htcm} has no new options planned, except the minimal "cm=" (or "m=" with "ft=" or "in=") and has not forked (yet) from the basic operation. The difference is {htcm} is faster and has fewer bugs than {height} and allows smaller numbers, such as height of athletic equipment or sports toys. The main purpose for {htcm} is to develop the next-generation features of {height}, which could then be rewritten after {htcm} has been thoroughly tested and discussed. The warnings displayed by {htcm} will be short, blue-link proofreader notes as "[fix double units]" in the style of "[citation needed]" and the logic depth is only 9 levels, versus 18 levels for {height}, of the wp:expansion depth limit. Because {htcm} only supports symbol names "cm=" and "m=" then it runs much faster than {height} with metres, which checks for 15 alias parameters: "metre=" or "meter=" or "metres=" or "meters=" or "feet=" or "foot=" etc. To discuss the design (or other issues), see Template_talk:Htcm#Design. -Wikid77 23:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

That looks good, and considering my closure above, seems like a fine way to move forward. Is it intended to be fully backward compatible? Gigs (talk) 17:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
forking templates is almost never a good idea. especially when it would be trivial to add support for cm to this template. Frietjes (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I think you've missed the point of this "fork" entirely, Frietjes. From what I can tell, it is intended to be a far quicker, far more efficient template, and a replacement of this one - which is a good thing, not a bad thing. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    no, I didn't miss the point of the fork. we should strive to improve this template, or completely replace both with {{convert}}. Frietjes (talk) 00:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Assuming the answer to my backward compatibility question is "yes", it seems the new template should simply replace this one (under this name), not co-exist. Gigs (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
    exactly, we don't need two templates, htcm should be viewed as a sandbox. Frietjes (talk) 19:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
So what's needed for the consensus established above to be implemented? At the moment this template is still grossly deficient.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:00, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
would take me about 15 seconds to add support for converting from cm, if that is what is needed. Frietjes (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. How about converting to cm? I'm very much a layman when it comes to interpreting template scripts, sorry.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 20:41, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
just need to know the syntax for specifying the output units as cm, since it appears there is not consensus to make this the default output unit. so, {{height|ft=6|in=1|to=cm}}, or {{height|ft=6|in=1|disp=cm}}, or ... Frietjes (talk) 21:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
There is no need for a fork. There is, in fact, no need for this template at all. It should just be replaced with {{convert}}. Jimp 09:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Metres vs centimetres[edit]

Moved to Template_talk:Height#Metric_output_should_be_.27cm.27: Bagumba (talk) 21:21, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Template:Height#Code makes no mention of the template's cm parameter even though in all likelihood that will be the unit sought. Also, should the default output remain as metres?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 02:46, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:Height#Instructions states, "...and feet and inches are converted to centimetres or meters." How? As far as I can tell it only converts to metres.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

A simple look at documentation history shows that you introduced the erroneous documentation (on 12 April 2014) regarding conversion of ft/in to cm, when no such support existed, nor has there been consensus for it. I am removing it.—Bagumba (talk) 20:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh. My apologies. I thought it had been added following the RfC. So why hasn't it been?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 12 April 2014[edit]

Consensus was reached to introduce cm usability to this template and that was done, but Template:Height#Instructions, Template:Height#Code and Template:Height#Template_data make zero mention of it, so any user coming to the template will still not be able to utilize the cm parameter. Can instructions for the use of cm with this template please be added? Thanks. Gibson Flying V (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

It is only the template code that is protected; the documentation is on a separate page. When viewing the template page, the top row is "Template documentation [view] [edit] [history] [purge]". Click the [view] link to go to the documentation page, where anyone can edit it. Johnuniq (talk) 03:20, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Oops. Thanks for that, Johnuniq. Now done.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 07:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Metric output should be 'cm'[edit]

This template's metric unit output is 'm' instead of the more commonly used 'cm'. Is there any reason why this should be the case?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 05:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I assume you have already forgotten Template_talk:Height/Archive_3#Straw_poll_on_units_of_measure_output_by_this_template, where the close said "there is much concern and opposition to any sort of blanket change, so all proposed mass changes for a particular field of endeavor need to have a new discussion that demonstrates clear consensus."—Bagumba (talk) 05:31, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
So your answer to my question above is...?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 07:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
There is no evidence that 'cm' is more commonly used than 'm'. GiantSnowman 08:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Relevant discussion started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Height. GiantSnowman 08:25, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Evidence starting from here. The amount of it is limited only by the number of sources you're willing to look at.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

For the record, an editor at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard had noted that Gibson Flying V chose to fragment discussion of cm output by posting to a four-month old, previously stale thread instead of here. See that thread for a complete view on this topic. I suggest that any future discussion be kept to relevant recent threads when possible, or at least provide notice at recent threads regarding related discussions.—Bagumba (talk) 21:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Not quite. The Template_talk:Height#Metres_vs_centimetres thread above was intended to relate to what Template:Height#Code and Template:Height#Instructions were saying about what the template actually does. This thread relates to what the template doesn't do, not what is said on the template page.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)