Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 September 13

September 13

Template:Infobox royal house

• Template:Infobox royal house (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Infobox noble house (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox royal house with Template:Infobox noble house.
A few weeks ago it was decided to merge {{Infobox noble house}} with {{infobox family}}. Unfortunately, it seems only one person who is actually familiar with the usage of {{Infobox noble house}} commented. I'd like to counterpropose the obvious merge of these two instead - they are nearly identical and could much, much more easily be merged. The templates for Houses of Nobility and Royalty are nearly identical and their subjects overlap, and many times I have seen articles on noble houses using the {{infobox royal house}} instead. The majority of their fields are of no use on {{infobox family}} and vice versa, and this merge would just cause confusion (who is the "current head" of the Kennedy family? What is the "current region" of the House of Romanov?). While the subjects might seem to be the same, the templates do not actually correspond with each other. Merging noble house/family templates is going to create a lot of work for someone when the same purpose could much more easily be accomplished by merging it with Royal House. —Мандичка^YO 😜 22:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• Merge per WP:INFOCOL and MOS:IB. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 02:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
• Conditional merge, but merge with {{infobox family}} - it is ready for it, as suggested in Template_talk:Infobox_family#Merged_version by SMcCandlish (talk · contribs). I partly disagree with the general comments here above. If the parametres are really an issue, I would say there are two solutions: 1) harmonise the terminology of the parametres for a broader application, and/or 2) for parametres that just won't work out that way, either a) make clear that not all parametres need to be filled, and b) employ a moduled ("aristocracy"?) solution - both a) and b) would be similar to the case of Template:Infobox person. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:11, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Parameters are "cheap". It's a trivial matter to support variant parameters, produce consistent output, and only "advertise" the currently desired parameters in the documentation. If some output is no longer desired, just disable the parameters in question.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  13:30, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Infobox adult biography

• Template:Infobox adult biography (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Infobox person (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox adult biography with Template:Infobox person.
per WP:INFOCOL and MOS:IB. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:35, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• Comment. Functionally, the adult biography template is essentially Infobox person with one field added (number_of_films). If that field can be supported, a merge should be uncontroversial. That said, documentation with the most used fields is the biggest issue. • Gene93k (talk) 20:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• comment, the number of films could be listed under |notable_works= or |known_for=. I don't think we need to add more parameters to {{infobox person}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
• Support the merge; the field "number_of_films" is pretty pointless, as the actors / filmmakers can put out dozens if not hundreds. It does not make the subject notable, and the number is no longer considered in the deletion discussions, for example. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
• Support. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
• Support The 'number of films' parameter needs manual updating, which sometimes might take a while to reflect the true amount of porn films one actor/actress did. It's not of much use. 81.106.34.193 (talk) 18:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC) (as User:My name is not dave)