Template talk:Irish TD table begin

Years in title of table

Actually

{{{start}}}{{#if:{{{end|}}}|–{{{end}}}|–}}

would always be the same as

{{{start}}}–{{{end|}}}

I'd change this but I'd like to ask first, should it just say "19XX–present" if there is no end year, or are there cases where "present" would be incorrect (end year exists but hasn't been entered)? — CharlotteWebb 16:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

In every case where an end year exists, it has been entered.

Assuming the start year is 1948, the current display is either 1948–1977 (if the end year is 1977) or "1948—" if there is no end year.

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Other_date_ranges says nothing on whether the trailing emdash is acceptable, but specifically deprecates the "19XX–present" format which you suggest. The guideline's suggestion of "since 1948" seems unhelpful here, because it adds an extra word which I think reduces clarity. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed width

See my note at User talk:CharlotteWebb about the problems with trying to use fixed width for this table. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Well is no way to make the caption the same width as the table without somehow forcing the caption and the table to use the same fixed width, or making the caption part of the table itself, but in this case the caption is so long that doing this would stretch the table to 100% unless a smaller size is specified. The only other way would be to manually add hard line-breaks to the caption, which would be an even sloppier approach. I give up. — CharlotteWebb 02:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I gave up too :(

In the end the inelegant disclaimer-much-wider-than-table seems like the least-worst option. I'll revisit the disclaimer in {{Irish TD table end}} and see if I can shorten the wording. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Somehow I thought of another way in my sleep. You could specify a fixed width for each column rather than for the entire table. You would apply it to the first single-cell of each column, and it would make all the columns the same width (this would arguably be a cosmetic improvement in any case). Then the div can match the total width of the table by multiplying.

Election winners
year	column 1	column 2	column 3	column 4	column 5
2000	Joe	Anne	Garret	Charlie	Sean
2001		Catherine			Mary
2002	Eric
2003		Michael	Brian

Note The columns in this table are used only for presentational purposes, and no significance should be attached to the order of columns or the numbers attached to them.

Try it with more columns

Election winners
year	column 1	column 2	column 3	column 4	column 5	column 6	column 7	column 8	column 9
2000	Joe	Anne	Garret	Charlie	Sean	Eduardo	Fausto	Angelina	Jesús
2001		Catherine			Mary	Gonzalo			Mercedes
2002	Eric					Teodoro		Rosalva	Sergio
2003		Michael	Brian			Reymundo		Fernando

Note The columns in this table are used only for presentational purposes, and no significance should be attached to the order of columns or the numbers attached to them.

Believe it or not I am trying to help. — CharlotteWebb 15:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

References broken

@BrownHairedGirl: Your changes in these edits end up breaking references in lots of including articles. These articles all have undefined reference errors, now, even though they include a refs= parameter for this template:

• Dublin Ballyfermot (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin Cabra (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin Clontarf (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin County (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin County West (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin Finglas (Dáil constituency)
• Dublin Rathmines West (Dáil constituency)

I think some invoking articles will lose a reference even if it didn't cause an error for an invocation of that reference name, as well. -- Mikeblas (talk) 19:40, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

• I've again reverted this template to a working version. The /testcases page shows the problem that's occurring on the pages that are breaking because the recent changes caused the refs= parameter to be ignored. Here, I'm just trying to fix a couple of dozen referencing errors introduced by these changes ... and the disappearance of any references that might not be re-invoked but disappear because the parameter is ignored. I'm sure there's some better fix, but I haven't picked apart this house of cards to figure out what it might be. -- Mikeblas (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

  @Mikeblas, please hang on and gimme a chance to examine this. Your reverts will break the navboxes in ~1500 articles, so I have undone them. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

  @Mikeblas: fixed in this edit.[1] BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

  'PS Note that your Template:Irish TD table begin/testcases page is not a valid test.

  It is not a Dáil constituency article, so the refs are correctly supressed. This behaviour is documented at Template:Irish_TD_table_begin#Use_in_navboxes. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mikeblas: please note that I didn't get a ping from you in your 24 July post,[2] because you mis-spelt my name. You fixed the spelling in your next edit,[3] but that doesn't make a ping: a ping only works in a new post. See WP:PING

So the first I knew about any of this was today, when I was notified of your reverts, which mangled at least one navbox (and up to 4) on all the biographical articles about Ireland's most senior politicians in the last 101 years. Your cure was more damaging than the problem it sought to resolve.

Before you reverted a widely-used template which you acknowledge you don't understand (and where your failed testcases suggest that you had not even read the /doc), it would have been better to make an actual ping or to post a brief message on my talk asking for my attention. As you can see, i responded very promptly when I was actually notified: only 13 minutes from your first revert to my fix.

This i not the first time that you have waded in with ill-considered reverts to this series of templates while development was underway. Please in future, more communication, less haste. Thanks. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry that my fix wasn't ideal. But please try to be kind: I'm trying to fix a problem I see. It's the second time I've drawn your attention to this same failure mode, which means it's the second time that you have broken the status quo behaviour of the template. That is, you are also causing some problems with your edits, despite the snarky and acerbic admonishments you're fond of writing. You didn't write tests yourself, so it can't be surprising that your changes broke functionality. You also didn't manually check on cases that you knew your changes had broken before. The old code worked fine on the testcase I wrote, so your declaration that it "isn't valid" seems a little dramatic ... or at least not clearly founded. Maybe you have some new behaviour you're struggling to implement -- the documentation you wrote was written after the referencing problems began happening. And what if your documentation simply isn't as clear as you think it is?

Sounds to me like we're both trying to make things better but not always meeting with complete success -- but you somehow think you're better at it than I am. I guess it's because it's because of the way you want to keep score. why do you think "damaging up to 4 articles" with a fix that resolved issues for about a dozen articles is worse? Why do you think waiting five days is "hasty"?

Meanwhile, I'm glad you've got a fix in place and I hope you'll take a moment to consider that other editors are real people ... just like you. -- Mikeblas (talk) 00:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)