Wikipedia talk:List of infoboxes/Proposed

Moon craters

I don't know anything about moon craters, but this looks like a useful infbox to have around. Gabbahead 19:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Rink hockey teams

I'd like to create one for rink hockey teams with some basic info: Logo, name, full name, pavillion, when founded, city, country, best position ever, chairman and coach. I'll be trying to see if I can understand all these things, but if someone could help in, I'd be appreciated :) Serte 17:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Question on the NFL Player Box

What is the weight taken from? Present weight? Rookie Year weight? And what if they're retired? Is it the last weight? Leobold1 (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Does this page get used, or could it be merged?

As part of an update and overhaul (See beginnings in the shape of {{The Infoboxwatch}}, and the list-merge proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Lists of infoboxes) I was wondering if this page got used much, and what you would like to change? - specifically - would you prefer for it to be more heavily promoted/linked? or, could it more usefully be merged into (for example) the WikiProject talkpage?

feedback on anything welcomed :) -- Quiddity (talk) 00:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(BUMP - I'm going to tag this page as Historical if there is no response in the next few days -- Quiddity (talk) 05:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

The page does get used and not historical, but there's a lot of stuff not being developed and needing to be removed as inactive. I have previously tried to tackle what is a huge page and trim it. Also akin to XfD or RfA, I introduced as system of subpages for new items where they can be developed, have discussion and documentation sub-subpages set up (to go live is then just a move). With a quiet moment I'm feeling like placing a delete warning to users whose section has been inactive for ages. Needs a system of closing unworkable, non developed, non implemented or outright rejected proposals (ie delete from page or delete relevant subpage)... stuff to sort out in due course :-) David Ruben ^Talk 03:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good.

I'm just trying to simplify some of the outdated/redundant material concerning infoboxes. Partially to make information easier to find/update, and partially so that discussions are more centrally located (less to watchlist, less problems with forumshopping).

If you have any suggestions for the thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Lists of infoboxes (or the more specific questions I left at User talk:Bryan Derksen#Lists of infoboxes) that'd be appreciated :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Since the parent page has been redirected, I propose moving Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/Proposals and rescoping the WikiProject to cater. Severo^TC 22:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Move seems sensible and more obvious naming than current awkwardness, would need renaming of its subpages of course. NB each proposal subpage will need any test examples altered from calling {{List of infoxes/Proposed/XXX}} to {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/Proposals/XXX}} - not difficult, but will need a little care and a quiet momement (latter I wont have for for the next few days, but I'll be happy to do after that). David Ruben ^Talk 02:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Infobox revisions

Should a revision of an infobox be submitted to this page as well and, if yes, on which criteria ?

• adding fields
• changing labels
• changing display order
• marking fields as 'deprecated' (but leaving them to keep proper display of old uses of the infobox)

etc.
I understand that deleting fields is out of the question, unless one can guarantee that they were never used.
The reason I'm asking this is that the talk page of the infobox template I'm intending to update is empty. It could well happen that I put my proposals on that talk page but nobody notices it. That could be considered comfortable - no opposition - but not conforming to the Wikipedia philosophy, where checking from others is highly desirable. Thank you for your opinions. Clpda (talk) 23:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest not bringing an existing infobox here for revision, but I appreciate the point of needing to getinvolved other editors:

• If infobox relates to work of a Wikiproject, then a discussion at that Wikiproject's discussion page is the best means of geting suitably interested editors to commment and help develop the template.
• I've been trying to make new proposals sit here as subpages (allowing them to have their own discussion pages, /doc documentation subpage and when going live merely renamed into main template space - thus preserving all the development history etc). Therefore can not move an active infobox back here in current set up (as it will be being activitely called by articles)... however, no reason we could not have a separate section providing links to existing infoboxes I guess...
• This discussion page might be an alternative location for requesting help and input with existing infobox templates, but has not been so used to date (hence probably few have on their watchlist), Alternatives are:
  • Wikipedia talk:List of infoboxes which seems wrong (that should be for discussing the "list of..." not the "...infoboxes" themselves.
  • Help talk:Infobox has no new threads since September 2007
  • Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes seems most active and has current discussion topics. This last option gets my tuppence of a vote :-) David Ruben ^Talk 01:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice, which I'll follow. I thought also, meanwhile, about writing to earlier developers that are detectable on the history page. Clpda (talk) 07:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Follow up: my proposal for a revision of the template is now posted on Template_talk:Infobox_Library. Clpda (talk) 13:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Some of the current requests appear to be obsolete, many have had little take-up, and there's a huge backlog. Would people be okay with me archiving the oldest parts of the list? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Glad to have additional help here (and so not seemingly just myself acting to maintain). The top half of in-page tables can be simply archived. The newer botton area with its subpages needs a little thought (ideally they get rename/moved to go live preserving editing history), question is what to do with proposals that are not worked upon (delete probably wrong, rename to List of infoboxes/Proposed/Archive and then would need tweek of coding to allow /docs to show active examples as at present ?) David Ruben ^Talk 23:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)