Template talk:S-ttl

message: 
I request, following discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization ("Several thoughts" and "Canadian ministry template sets"), the addition of code for five additional regent parameters, in order to increase the total number to eight and allow for the potential use of the parameters for MPs in multiple-seat constituencies.
The proposed code for the template is the following:
|width="40%" style="text-align: center;" rowspan="1"|        



The additions are actually rather simple; one only has to copy the code for a regent and their year and adjust the numbers. Waltham, The Duke of 06:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Y Done – Nihiltres{t.l} 19:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increase of regents parameters from three to eight 

message: The text for alongside doesn't really work for non-political titles, see Neville Bonner#External Links. I suggest dropping the word "Served". Bazj (talk) 11:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or replacing "alongside" with "with" as is used for MPs for multiple-seat constituencies, e.g. William Yates Peel Opera hat (talk) 23:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alongside... 

message: Is it possible to add a parameter that puts a text where the "alongside" and "with" parameters put, but without adding any text before? I need to put "post consulatum Longini (East)", but it is impossible, if I understand correctly. --TakenakaN (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post consulatum Longini 

message: It would be pretty usefull for tables like this one to have the ability to have a cell span the whole table. Doesn't seem like a hard thing to implement (basically add something like colspan="1" right before  rowspan="1". Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 10:15, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I confess that this is a most surprising and anomalous use of succession boxes; it lies entirely outside the remit of this template system as it is understood by the WikiProject managing it. As far as I can tell, succession boxes have been intended since their very inception for titles which form succession chains (i.e., are passed from one holder to the next), and the current system has been designed with this function alone in mind. I do not know when they were considered appropriate for listing all manner of records, but your proposal amounts to facilitating a major shift in the character and scope of the succession box system. Therefore, I propose taking it to WT:SBS, where others can weigh in. Waltham, The Duke of 10:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the alternative seems to live with people hard-coding a hack. But I'll mention it to SBS. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 10:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not like hacks, but using something other than a succession box for this type of statistics would be closer to what I had in mind... We'll see. Thank you for making the post at SBS; I just hope that replies will be forthcoming soon enough because I don't trust myself to come up with a satisfactory solution on my own. We have something of a staffing problem, you see. Waltham, The Duke of 14:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that the usage sought should not be in a succession box. It looks like something which could and should be included in an infobox. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add {{para|colspan}}? 

message: A discussion has been opened up at Line of succession to the British throne regarding a new field "claim".  This field would be handled exactly the same way as the "creation" field is handled.  I have demonstrated its use in the artcile Prince Friso of Orange-Nassau. Martinvl (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New field "claim" 

message: :It is requested that the text
:: 
:be replaced by the text
:: 
:This will create a new field claim that will behave in exactly the same was as the field creation.  If both fields are filled, the template will display the creation text ahead of the claim text.
Justification
:The purpose of this change is to document the claim that somebody might have to the title when that claim is not actually mentioned in the article itself.  For example, see the claim that Prince Friso of Orange-Nassau has in the List of succession to the British throne.  This has been discussed at Talk:Line of succession to the British throne. The only areas of controversy are misuse (hence documentation) and "field creep".
:Once done,I will update the documentation. Martinvl (talk) 18:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like the SBS to have a chance to weigh in on this discussion if they haven't already.  I've notified them.  Technically it's a simple enough change, of course.  I'll leave the request open for now. --joe deckertalk to me 06:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Disabling editprotected request for the time being to see if any objections are raised from the WikiProject. If not, ping me and I'll action this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:48, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 10 May 2012 

message: In this template on, for example, William Kelly Wallace, we have . I propose that we subdivide that parameter, so that we would have something like:   (and hard-code the en-dash in the template code), so that we have more granular data to aid machine readability. Once the template is recoded, we'd run a bot to convert the existing parameters. Any thoughts? Can you help? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sensible change, I'm not in a position to help with the bot coding right now, I'm afraid.   --j⚛e deckertalk 13:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The 'years' parameter isn't always used for dates – it is sometimes (whether or not it should be!) used for text, explanation, description or similar. DBD 16:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That's, ah, very broken; the template has other parameters better suited for that sort of thing. If there are things that don't match dates in the year parameter, the bot should probably shovel them into some kind of maintenance category. I think it's generally a good idea, although I would call the parameters "from" and "to" (a lot of these templates are maintained "by hand", and I'd prefer to document their role on the template's documentation page rather than needlessly lengthening their own names). Maybe also a tweak to the template to suppress display of the range if "from" and "to" are identical, a not uncommon situation? Choess (talk) 18:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data granularity 

message: Do we want the correct format when a person succeeds themselves to a position that has in fact only changed name to include multiple rows? See for example the succession box in Mikhail Gorbachev. Circéus (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change in title name 

message: I've been testing a slightly altered version of the code at User:Whaleyland/Template:s-ttl to try and add two new parameters to resolve issues I've been coming across. The "Disputed" parameter will add an extra "with" line below the current 25 lines to allow the listing of a rival to the title. We may want to expand this parameter out further to a few more numbers. The style is identical to that of "with" except it says "Disputed by:".
The other parameter is to resolve a formatting error that occurs when people try to add "jure uxoris" beside a title. "Jure uxoris" means "in right of wife" in Latin and was a fairly common term used in medieval and early modern law when husbands took their wife's title. The parameter, which currently is just "uxoris" (the user must enter any plain text as the response or it will not show up), prompts "(jure uxoris" beside the title.
Here's a sample of the code:
What do you guys think? How do you think this should be improved or expanded? One thing I'd like to do is try to get it so typing "uxoris" automatically prompts the command without the need of typing "=" or anything after that. Let me know. – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 22:50, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed the issue with the parameter needing a value. Now just typing "uxoris" should prompt the data. – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 23:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding "Disputed by" and "uxoris" parameters 

message: I propose adding a parameter called order, which would allow an editor to indicate that a person was the nth holder of an office and where the creation parameter would not be applicable. This would be displayed in front of the title. For example, for Woodrow Wilson, one would enter:



The output of the title line would be: "28th President of the United States". This is a feature that already exists in . It would make sense to enable it here. Ergo Sum  01:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Support – I see no problem with the idea. Granted, it could be overused if people start numbering counts and dukes and whatnot, but many of the British aristocratic articles already do that, so I suppose it's fine.  – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 21:47, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I just put this proposal in the sandbox, which can be seen here. The only thing I'm unsure of is whether the nth number displayed should be bolded or not. I'm inclined to say it should be bolded, since the title after it is already bolded. Ergo Sum  03:51, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely keep it bolded for stylistic reasons. Now that I've looked around, it appears the number has disappeared for most aristocrats in their succession boxes, but they are still there in the article titles, and of course those are bold so keep it bold for sure.  – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 07:55, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add series ordinal 

message: I would like to propose an additional parameter "under", similar to the current "alongside" parameter.  It would be used for offices that have a direct subordinate relationship, notably Lieutenant Governors serving under Governors or Vice Presidents serving under Presidents.  Additional uses could include cabinet members under a President / Prime Minister, or a Prime Minister under a monarch.  I think that it would be so generally useful that I'm quite surprised it hasn't been included already.
The proposed code is:

This is simply the existing "alongside" code with the word "under" substituted for "alongside".  I believe this is a rather straightforward, simple request that would be generally useful ... even more so than the existing "alongside" parameter, as this is a much more common relationship between offices.
2001:558:6017:107:78A6:8733:B442:2A44 (talk) 07:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 03:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed "under" parameter