Template talk:Given name

Automatically add a comment?

Is it possible for this template to automatically add a comment to the page stating something to the effect of "This page is for listing NOTABLE people with the name XXX. In general, the person in question should already have a Wikipedia article about them or relating to them. Please do not add your own name to this list. Thank you."

Okay, that text is not perfect, because despite grave COI concerns, I know Wikipedia would theoretically allow a famous celebrity to add their own name to a disambig page. But I'd like to see some kind of automated warning, because the problem of people typing in their own name, seeing a list and saying, "Oooo, it is perfectly fine for me to add myself!" is quite widespread... --Jaysweet (talk) 11:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It is technically possible for the template to include a comment. My suggestion would be to add a comment like <!-- A list of people may be included on this page. People listed should meet the [[WP:BIO]] standard for inclusion in Wikipedia. Additions of people who do not meet this standard will be removed. -->f --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Mostly given names?

Is this template appropriate on a page that mostly, but not exclusively, lists given names? I'm working on Laetitia, which currently has {{Disambig}}. --zenohockey (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Parameter order matters

It appears that the 'nocat' parameter needs to be the last parameter presented. Compare the two versions of Yusuke; 'nocat' not last vs. 'nocat' last. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Placement of templates on disambiguation pages

I'm trying to initiate some discussion regarding placement of this template on disambiguation pages at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#surname and given name templates on dab pages. older ≠ wiser 13:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Broken?

The template doesn't currently seem to be inserting categories as described in the documentation. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 09:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:All disambiguation page

There is now a discussion about how the disambig, set index and name boxes should categorise pages. See the discussion over at Template talk:Dmbox#Category:All disambiguation pages.

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Not just an index?

Was there any discussion before changing "This page or section lists people with the given name" to "This page is an index of articles on people that share..." ? I think they are different. Good articles about names include information about the origin and meaning of a name; even if the biggest part of the page is one or more lists of names, the page is more than an index. I propose to revert the text. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Too much disambiguation?

I understand the reason for family name disambiguations, but first (given) name disambigs? Do we want a page listing tens of thousands notable Johns? I think all articles tagged with this template should be deleted. Thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 00:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

They aren't disambiguations (surnames nor given names), but anthroponymy articles or list articles. They cannot simply be deleted en masse. Also, I do not believe we have a page listing tens of thousands of notable Johns. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy/Home backup#Background reading -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Generally, disambig pages for a given name should only list people where that is their only name. For John, for example, you would list the various King John, and the Bible Johns, but you would not list John Smith. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 15:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Text revision

The template text says, "This page or section lists people that share the same given name.", but the documentation says, "Do not use this template on disambiguation pages that contain a list of people by given names." So which is correct? Should the first sentence be updated to say something like, "This page is about a given name."? Ibadibam (talk) 22:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Some disambiguation pages list both people with a certain name and other entities (places, brands, other things) with the same name. These pages have already the 'disambiguation page' template, and apparently a double template is not desirable. When the disambiguation page lists only people with the name, and no other entities, the disambiguation page template should be replaced with a given/surname template. For example, I just did this on Anouk.

I think the template text is correct: a list of persons is what the template is intended for. This is information for readers (end users). Editors should look at the template description before adding a template, so the text need not be changed for them. Bever (talk) 00:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

masculine, feminine or unisex?

I modified the category of Ossip to indicate that it is a Masculine given name because that was the information I was looking for but it was not immediately obvious from the page without looking at all the individuals. Would it be a good idea to move all given names into the relevant masculine/feminine/unisex subcategory?

Is unisex really necessary/useful? A name can have multiple categories and it seems to me it would be more useful for unisex names to be listed under both masculine and feminine. DenisHowe (talk) 21:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

No opinion about the first point, but there are surely names in some cultures that are neither masculine nor feminine and belong only in the unisex category. Ibadibam (talk) 19:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

It's time to face facts

We need a another parameter, for first names that are not given names.

"Judy" or "Doug" or "Bob" are not usually given names (sometimes they are) but rather -- choose the term you prefer -- hypocorisms, pet names, affectionate diminutives, diminutives, or nicknames. There's quite a bit of difference: see the article Given name, it is the formal personal name (first name in English-speaking cultures) given to one at birth or christening, and written on one's birth certificate. It's not at all one's nickname, they're entirely different things, usually related (Judith --> Judy) but sometimes not (Roland --> Bunny).

Yet we have, and will have more, articles about these shortened forms. Currently the template allows us to say:

This page lists people that share...

• ...the same personal name
• ...the same given name or the same family name
• ...the same family name
• ...the same given name

But there's no place to add "nickname" (or whatever term we want to use). It's not true and and not a service to the reader to place this template at the bottom of "Judy", "Judi", or "Judie", or "Zack (given name)" or "Doug" or what have you and state that these people were all given there name, formally, at birth. (N.B.: "personal name" means full name, e.g. "James Smith".)

It's complicated by the fact that sometimes people will formally name their kids "Bo Anb" or "Judi" or what have you, so we have to include that in nicknames. Anyway, I propose to add the parameter "nickname" giving an additional phrase:

This page lists people that share...

• ...the same personal name
• ...the same given name or the same family name
• ...the same family name
• ...the same given name
• ...the same given name or nickname

So OK, my only question is what term to use? where I have nichname?

• Nickname?
• Diminutive?
• Affectionate diminutive?
• Hypocorism?
• Pet name?
• ???

Or, instead of "given name or nickname", just use "first name" -- that covers both. However, this leaves out Hungarians, East Asians, some Africans, and Turanga Leela, so... don't think that'd do?

My feeling is to go with "nickname" but there are problems with each. Before proceeding I request counsel from my colleagues. Herostratus (talk) 02:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

How about both? Change "given name" to "first name" and add "nickname"? ··gracefool 💬 01:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 3 June 2018

Please change the coding where it says:

{{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|page or section}}

replacing it with:

{{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|{{#if:{{{page|}}}|page|page or section}}}}

Having a conditional parser for designating when the text should be "section specific" implies we could use a parameter for "page specific" text as well, especially when the default says "this page or section". The requested change introduces the parameter |page= without affecting the existing transclusions unless or until the new parameter is ever used. I'll update the template's documentation if the change is accepted, unless the editor effecting the change chooses to update the /doc their self. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@John Cline:  Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 12:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 5 June 2018

Please edit markup to establish this template's tranclusion on disambiguation pages as a "<strong class="error"></strong>". Where the templates coding begins as:

{{dmbox
| type = setindex
| image = [[File:WPanthroponymy.svg|30px|link=]]
| text = ...

Change it to begin as:

{{#ifeq:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAMEBASE}} (disambiguation)
|<strong class="error";>[[Category:Wikipedia page transclusions with strong class errors]]</strong>
|{{dmbox
| type = setindex
| image = [[File:WPanthroponymy.svg|30px|link=]]
| text = ...

And add closing brackets at the bottom where it now says:

    {{#if:{{{cat9|}}}|[[Category:{{{cat9|}}}]]}}
  }}
| <!-- Don't categorise when not in main (article) space. -->
}}<noinclude>

Making it say:

    {{#if:{{{cat9|}}}|[[Category:{{{cat9|}}}]]}}
  }}
| <!-- Don't categorise when not in main (article) space. -->
}}
}}<noinclude>

Currently it is possible to transclude {{Given name}} on disambiguation pages which would potentially break template {{disambiguation}}'s internal code, changing it from a disambiguation page into a set index article.

Effecting the requested change (tested as well) will establish such transcluions as a <strong class="error">, reduce template's output to null, and sort the disambiguation page with the improper transclusion into Category:Wikipedia page transclusions with strong class errors.

This change will not affect transclusions on pages that are not disambiguation pages. I think this is a needed improvement. I have already updated the template documentation anticipating acceptance of this request.--John Cline (talk) 12:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@John Cline: Do you have a sense of how many pages this will affect? Would it make more sense to first implement a tracking category (e.g. Category:Disambiguation pages with Given name templates), giving the servers a week or so to catch up, fixing the affected pages, and then implementing the error message? --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for considering this request Ahecht, I appreciate you very much. I manually scanned the list of transclusions and found the following 27 disambiguation pages that have {{Given name}} transcluded upon them:

• Valerii (disambiguation)
• Æthelfrith (disambiguation)
• Myles (disambiguation)
• Æthelstan (disambiguation)
• Callixenus (disambiguation)
• Othniel (disambiguation)
• Manucho (disambiguation)
• Cyrus (disambiguation)
• Zayed (disambiguation)
• Josephus (disambiguation)
• Mandar (disambiguation)
• Boudewijn (disambiguation)
• Tendai (disambiguation)
• Hoda (disambiguation)
• Thrasamund (disambiguation)
• Kwaku (disambiguation)
• Shayla (disambiguation)
• Sumayyah (disambiguation)
• Abu Nasr (disambiguation)
• Aristagoras (disambiguation)
• Mesfin (disambiguation)
• Emlyn (disambiguation)
• Ramya (disambiguation)
• Hans Christian (disambiguation)
• Sheikh Zayed (disambiguation)
• Waldrada (disambiguation)
• Sheikh Muhammad (disambiguation)

While correcting these <strong class="error"> transclusions would be easy enough by working through the list given above, I'd like to see them sorted through Category:Wikipedia page transclusions with strong class errors to ensure such sorting triggers off the <strong class="error"> condition. And while correcting these 27 is important enough, perhaps even trivial to some, it is not the primary reason for my having requested this change.

The main benefit, according to my system of beliefs, is the preemptive measure it will serve in preventing any future transclusion errors of this kind from occurring, and the immeasurable harvest we are certain to reap by correcting the flawed reasoning giving birth to these tranclusions in the moment when they are first being tried.

In my opinion, server lag is not a reason to delay implementation of the edit I am requesting. I am, however, happy to consider reasoned rebuttals to the contrary. Thank you again.--John Cline (talk) 21:24, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@John Cline: I've made the requested changes to the sandbox, so you can transclude {{Given name/sandbox}} to test it. I was hesitant to implement it in the main template beacuse it would leave those 27 pages without any context. I assume that fixing those pages would involve swapping {{Given name}} for {{Human name disambiguation}} or {{Disambiguation|human name}}, so one way to avoid the missing context issue is for the template to automatically add {{Disambiguation|human name}} if it's on a disambiguation page. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Ahecht, I understand your concern.

After sampling the list from above, I noticed that some pages have both {{Disambiguation}} and {{Given name}} transcluded and yet some have only {{Given name}} transcluded while they are titled in the "Page name (disambiguation)" form. Of the latter, some will require replacing {{Given name}} with {{Disambiguation|human name}} while others will retain {{Given name}} and be moved from their current title in the form of "Page name (disambiguation)" to a title in the form of "Page name (given name)" or "Page name (name)" with {{Given name|section=yes}} being used in the appropriate "given name" section.

No matter how it gets sliced, the automated repair of one article's <strong class="error"> will create a symphony of corresponding errors on another page with regard to its <strong class="error">. Having said that, the only practical solution that I can see is to repair all 27 pages before implementing the request which I will begin to now do.

I will return and post to this thread when that has occurred, so you can know your prudent concern has been allayed. If you would like to deactivate the edit request, or place it on hold (if that's even possible) I will not holler foul. Thank you again.--John Cline (talk) 23:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Additional categories

Shouldn't {{given name}} place the page somewhere in the Category:Set indices tree?

Ideally there would also be an additional category for the case where {{given name|type=both}} is used.

Short description

Please add noreplace to the {{short description}} template — {{short description|Name list|noreplace}} — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)