Template talk:Infobox writer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Infoboxes
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Infoboxes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Infoboxes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 

Proposed cause_of_death field[edit]

I think this field would be useful. Voxfax (talk) 07:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

No thank you. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
No thank you, from me also. It's not part of the essential information one wants in a quick overview of someone as a writer. --Pi zero (talk) 00:16, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Convert to wrapper[edit]

I would like to suggest to make it a wrapper of {{Infobox person}} -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 21:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Similar proposals are at:
Infoboxes involve difficult issues and it would be better to deal with one at a time. Please pick one of them and put the others on hold. If a change is agreed, the change should occur and be fully tested before working on others. Johnuniq (talk) 23:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

RFC[edit]

Closed as no consensus. Although there were more editors who supported the proposal, valid arguments opposing it had roughly the same weight as valid arguments supporting it.- MrX 23:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template talk:Infobox scientist#Convert to wrapper have been closed and decision was convert. Now I have created sandbox version of this template and also the testcases. Hence, proposing to convert this as well. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

  • I think here the original ordering of the display and treatment of works makes sense in the standalone template. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Do it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:44, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • (Summoned by bot) Sure. L3X1 (distænt write) 18:32, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Seems uncontroversial. Maproom (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. (Summoned by bot) Keep as separate, because the current fork as {infobox_writer} allows for special ordering of new data fields. In general, taking infobox forks and switching them all to a funnel of {infobox_person} will hamper innovation and trigger massive reformatting of pages to alter the layout. Plus the wrapper adds new levels of errors, such as the option "misc=" being misspelled in the wrapper as "mics=" (as of 16Sep2017). Instead, keep separate and consider new data-fields, such as image2 +caption2 to show writer at another conference or add custom top/mid/end blank fields: top-label1, top-data1, mid-label1, mid-data1, end-label1 (etc.) to provide custom blank data parameters, to appear at either the top, middle, or bottom of the infobox. Beware funneling forks into "one-size-fails-all" wrappers which would drastically hinder innovation of infobox layout. Major design flaw, so oppose wrapper. -Wikid77 (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. I'll just repeat what I said in the other thread: Its a maintenance butt-pain to try to re-re-re-implement the same features over and over again on a wide profusion of redundant templates, and the result is rarely consistent parameters anyway (people keep giving them inconsistent names and output). This is a constant source of problems. Just do away with it. To the extent topical bio infoboxes need special parameters, we can implement those as custom-parameter pass-throughs (i.e., implement |customN= at the meta-template).  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  15:36, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ethnicity in officeholder infoboxes[edit]

Hi @Fram: please help "Ethnicity" parameter has been removed from the infobox writer, then how come in the article Rabindranath Tagore or Kazi Nazrul Islam "Ethnicity" is showing in the infobox, I'm confused.--Anandmoorti (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

It has been removed from the documentation[1] but not from the actual template. I'll remove it now. Fram (talk) 06:36, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Alright.--Anandmoorti (talk) 12:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Add residence field[edit]

I propose adding the ‘residence’ field that is included in Template:Infobox_person to indicate where a person notably resides if different than birthplace. We currently include a number of fields regarding the writer’s location (birth place, resting place, death place), and also fields for nationality and citizenship, but no field that would indicate where the writer currently lives. Especially for living immigrant or expat writers, this is useful and key information (for dead writers, can usually be inferred from death_place field). I searched the archives of this talk page for the terms ‘location’ and ‘residence’ and below are all the discussions that I found that touch on the subject, along with my annotations in italics:

  1. Template_talk:Infobox_writer/Archive_4#Citizenship.2C_ethnicity.2C_and_nationality This is a long discussion of citizenship, ethnicity and nationality fields. During the discussion, one editor proposed residence field, and there was no further discussion on that point.
  2. Template_talk:Infobox_writer/Archive_6#Nation_of_resdience Editor proposed ‘nation of residence’ field. There was no further discussion.
  3. Template_talk:Infobox_writer/Archive_7#Citizenship.2C_Ethnicity_and_Nationality Editor suggested ‘nation of residence’ field during a separate discussion, and there was no further discussion on that point.
  4. Template_talk:Infobox_writer/Archive_9#Residence @Mika1h: suggested residence field be added. Only response was @Pi zero: commented: “On a quick search, there are apparently some discussions in the archives of this talk page about "residence", or "nation of residence", in relation to "nationality". The arrangement of those fields is something that's evidently been struggled with. If we were going to tinker with that part of the infobox design, it would be worthwhile to investigate in more depth the history of discussions of the nationality, citizenship, and ethnicity fields.”

In all four instances an editor suggested a residence field be added, and in no instances does an editor argue against the change. In three instances there was no further discussion, and in one instance Pi zero suggested further research, which I’ve attempted to do here. Regarding the discussion #4, that we research the history of nationality, citizenship and ethnicity fields for this infobox, I didn't find discussion regarding how these relate to residence other than passing discussion of overlap between nationality and residence. But, I think nationality usually has a different meaning than residence. A person can identify as a Serbian (their nationality), be born and raised in Russia, and live and write in the United States, for example, and all three could be notable, infobox worthy, facts. Or, it could be unclear what nationality a writer identifies with (their homeland, their ethnicity, or their adopted country), but their place of residence is usually clear.

Dejan Stojanović is an example where this would be useful - the article includes where he lives, which is different than his nationality, but no way to include in the Infobox. That this author lives in the States is very notable, which is what inspired this post. 2604:6000:7B0E:8C00:A15A:2359:D8FD:8420 (talk) 03:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that adding a residence field would act as a challenge for people who like to spend time adjusting infoboxes. However, it would be very rare for the residence of a writer to be of more than gossip interest. Why not mention the name of the person they lasted dated? Or the name of their dog? I have not encountered Dejan Stojanović and seeing the location of his residence in the infobox would tell me precisely nothing. Anything significant about it would have to be in prose, in the article. Johnuniq (talk) 04:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
One difference between adding pets or dating history, vs. my request to add residence, is that I'm the fifth editor to make this suggestion as I documented above. And, if we do include, it doesn't mean that trivial residence info will be include in every bio infobox - rather, editors will have an option to include or not include whether residence is notable, depending on the context of a particular bio, and we can include explicit instruction only to include if notable and if different than birth country.
For another example, see Salmon Rushdie, born in Iran, citizen of UK, and living in US for last 17 years.2604:6000:7B0E:8C00:B91F:4407:3AF6:3B15 (talk) 05:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
@Johnuniq: I'm the OP. I want to push this to an efficient conclusion. If you're strongly opposed, I'll let the proposal drop. I think this is particularly relevant to living expat authors, but you can probably better judge the hassle vs. benefit of changing an infobox. Otherwise, would a WP:3O request be OK, or would you prefer a different process?45.46.153.12 (talk) 03:50, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
There does not seem to be much support. You might try the talk page of an article that would be affected and see if anyone thinks it would be useful. I haven't looked lately, but my guess is that WP:3O is more for disputes over article content. Changing an infobox is somewhat different. Johnuniq (talk) 04:49, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

|residence= exists uncontroversially in {{Infobox person}}, is already used in 250 transclusions of this template, and appears to have more support than objections (though both are not passionate). I have added the parameter to this template. Let's see if it causes actual trouble in actual articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:20, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

alternative names[edit]

If a writer is best known by one name (in this case birth name) but also writes under another name (here married name), how can we show that married name in the infobox. It was deleted as "pseudonym" by an editor who said "wasn't a pen name". The definition in the template documentation is "Any of the person's aliases or pen names." Is that intended to include an alternative real name as in this case? What's the definition of an alias or a pen name? The article in question is Adelaide Phillpotts who wrote her later works as Adelaide Ross after a late marriage. I'm sure she's not the only woman to whom this applies, and there are of course also men who change their name legally at some point in their life. Pinging @Jimbonarna: as the editor who removed this name. PamD 11:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

The more general {{Infobox person}} has a useful field "Other names", missing in this one. PamD 11:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
This is a good example of why templates like this are increasingly being turned into wrappers for {{Infobox person}} as they should have been from the start. Its a maintenance butt-pain to try to re-re-re-implement the same features over and over again on a wide profusion of redundant templates, and the result is rarely consistent parameters anyway (people keep giving them inconsistent names and output).  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  15:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I was just attempting to add "other name" to Ferenc Molnár, since a huge number of English sources refer to him as "Franz Molnar", only to discover that the parameter doesn't exist, and "nickname" and "pseudonym" don't really apply. --tronvillain (talk) 15:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Image_upright[edit]

|image_upright= needs to be added to the list of known parameters. It is being shown as an unknown parameter in articles like Edgar Allan Poe.--Auric talk 00:10, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

added. Frietjes (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)