Template talk:Infobox NRHP/Archive 1

message: *Yes, an optional line for NHLs, as I suggested over at the project talk page!
*How about setting it up a la the city and road infoboxes so it could include both an image and location map? That way you could use a map for a large historic district (there are many) if a picture won't do (Or use the pictures of individual buildings within it elsewhere in the article). Daniel Case 15:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope this isn't a problem, but I changed the default with to 300px, since a lot of other infoboxes default to this. This change is particularly useful for those pages which use more than one infobox (such as San Francisco Armory), allowing the infoboxes to be stacked evenly. Peter G Werner 20:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: My infobox thoughts

message: * Should it be clarified that this is the United States National Register of Historic Places in the infobox? --Dystopos 22:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  USA 

message: What's the recommended way to deal with NHLs that are Historic Districts?  What should be entered as nrhp_type?  -Ipoellet 21:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It defaults to that, essentially. One only needs to add a parameter if it's an HD or NHL or such. It's explained in the documentation above. -Ebyabe 00:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  nrhp_type 

message: Hey folks...a couple of things:
:Category:Historic districts was getting unmanageably large, and since the majority of the articles were from the US, I split those out into :Category:Historic districts in the United States.  However, the new subcategory still has way more than 200 articles.  The obvious solution would be to create subcategories for the states with the most historic district articles, but it turns out that the majority of the articles are being placed in the category by this infobox.  I don't know enough about template code to get around this, or even if it's possible, but it would be great if someone did.
Also, Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Historic districts/Infobox example and this talk page are being placed in the Historic districts in the United States category.  This should not be happening, as Wikipedia pages are not historic districts.
-Nogood 09:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Historic districts and this infobox 

message: The location map template seems to support lat / long, and since the template takes that as inputs, why not use this when they are present, and only use the superimpose when an x / y are present? pw 18:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and made this change, it seems to work.  If an image value is present it does the old behavior, if not, but lat and long are present, it uses the locator map.  Let me know if any problems. pw 16:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a locmapin parameter that will use a more specific location map, if one is available.  See :Template:Location map/doc for a listing of maps available for specific states.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Location map]] vs Superimpose 

message: The forced image size is oversized and quite large on most screens, and there seems to be no way to add a parameter to size the image used in the infobox smaller. If there is one, please explain how that is done, but if there isn't, could someone please add a parameter for optional image sizing? Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 02:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forced image size 

message: 10-Oct-2007: I am adding new sizing parameters named "imagesize" and "mapwidth" to the current revision of "Template:Infobox nrhp" defaulting as:
:: imagesize=260px (current default, was 300px days ago)
:: mapwidth=220 (new default, was 300 yesterday; omit "px")
Those sizing parameters are similar to options found in other infoboxes, such as for cities/towns.  However, I also believe that an optional map should be displayed at the bottom, along with the top image, if available, in the manner of other infoboxes which can display both a top-image and bottom-map.  For that reason, the "mapwidth" parameter is separate from the "imagesize" parameter.  Changes to display both image+map are in testing for a later revision.  -Wikid77 12:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New sizing parameters 

message: 10-Oct-2007: Coding of templates can be very tedious. As of 2007, the template MediaWiki language ("") is still a beta technology, and so bugs have been difficult to detect.  In particular, templates cannot (yet) detect commas in numbers or "px" added to a number, which is trivial in older computer languages.
Recent bugs have included:
* Invalid "px" for Template:Location_map width=260.  Do not add "px" for the width parameter in Location_map, or else the map may expand across the screen.
* Showing "colspan=2" below "" which was meant to span 2 columns, not appear as visible text.  The text can be hidden by " colspan=2 ".  Wikitables tend to be very fragile for keyword placement, but those tables usually work quite well, if every detail is absolutely correct.
* Misspelled parameter names: The template MediaWiki language does not yet generate a concordance listing of names used, so misspelled parameter names are difficult to spot: proof-reading involves character-by-character validation across 30,000 characters or more.  Yes, it is every bit that friggin wretched.  Beware invalid "lon_degrees" should be "long_degrees" even though prefix "lon_" is common for longitude in other templates.  A trick is to search for misspellings ("lon_" or such) to see if they occur where they shouldn't, or load a template into a spell-checker and scan the list of words used.
Please be patient about the templates; the technology is slowly improving, and everyone is suffering about templates.  In a world where college dropouts are computer billionaires, it is good to have a huge sense of humor about compu-trash, but yes, phenomenally better technology is easy, when focusing beyond today's dinky computers. -Wikid77 22:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever has been tweaked in the template, doesn't take, it must be somewhere else, because no version of this template shows correctly, the current revision is the one from Sept 29. IvoShandor 17:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See above but this appears, for example: "Kellogg's Grove
(U.S. National Register of Historic Places)<noinclude> Optional parameters:
* barcolor - background hue (default: PaleTurquoise)"
IvoShandor 17:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bugs October 2007 

message: 12-Oct-2007: I am adding sizing parameter "boxwidth" along with "imagesize" and "mapwidth" to the current revision of "Template:Infobox nrhp" defaulting as:
:* boxwidth=265px (use 300px to match prior Infobox width)
:* imagesize=260px (new default, was 300px days ago)
:* mapwidth=220 (current default, was 300 on 09Oct07; omit "px")
Those sizing parameters are similar to options found in other infoboxes, such as for cities/towns.  However, I also believe that an optional map should be displayed at the bottom, along with the top image, if available, in the manner of other infoboxes which can display both a top-image and bottom-map.  For that reason, the "mapwidth" parameter is separate from the "imagesize" parameter.  Changes to display both image+map are in testing for a later revision (not in current template).  -Wikid77 02:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More sizing parameters 

message: 12-Oct-2007: I am centering the Location_map by using both the parameter "float=center" and the wikitable directive (style="text-align: center;").  Remember, in a wikitable, after putting a cell bar ("|") in column 1, the cell-directives can be specified, such as:
::: colspan=2  style="text-align: center;"
Many templates have problems because the required wikitable vertical-bars do not get properly generated into column 1.  I am working to fix the column-alignment bug still in the recent revisions of Template:Infobox_nrhp.  -Wikid77 02:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centering stuff 

message: 12-Oct-2007: The display of the empty template was showing the literal text wrapped within 1 column rather than across 2 columns:
::: colspan="2" 
The wikitable directive for "colspan" became visible due to a logic error in trying to show the literal template name "" in the midst of specifying the "colspan" directive without triggering the literal field by "|" (vertical-bar).  Because the subtitle-template contains the 2nd half of the cell-directive, followed by the cell's literal field (designated by "|"), the mode setting is split between the Infobox-template and the subtitle-templates.  The fix was to avoid calling the subtitle-template when displaying the blank-template, and simply force the cell's literal field to appear by generating "|" in the parent template, avoiding the "|" generated in the subtitle-template's literal field.
The problem is basically the issue of mode-confusion between 2 code modules: being in directive-mode and trying to show literal results, but literal-mode is triggered by the subtitle template which is never called, leaving the parent template in directive-mode and auto-forced into literal-mode showing all data, including the typically unseen directive ("colspan=2"), which is seen then but not processed. Again, the fix was to explicitly trigger the cell's literal-mode when needed, but only after the directives had been processed, not during. -Wikid77 04:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixed colspan bug 

message: 12-Oct-2007: In the spirit of "Why Johnny can't read" let me emphasize again that the template's MediaWiki language is a beta technology, an infant coding language, that is extremely error prone. (It is a "miracle" that templates work at all.)  I guess the Wiki software developers have limited time to make improvements, so we're stuck with this bizarre MediaWiki language (") that makes templates hard to develop.
The MediaWiki language is, very much, a toy-language, which aborts on larger templates.  In computer technology, the wiki-code is a forced collision of the wikitable language, that expects row-tokens & cell-tokens ("|-" or "|" tokens) only in column-1 (egad!), jumbled together with a rambling expression language (not a statement language) that is very fragile about line breaks & code indentation, leading to rampant coding of long one-liner code sections within typical templates.  The MediaWiki language doesn't even have local variables (which are trivial to implement), while supporting many template parameters, which must be re-calculated on each reference, because calculations cannot be stored in the "non-existent" local variables.  Kids, don't do this: don't ever design computer languages that way: always support local variables and follow a string grammar allowing line breaks.  Enough about all that. -Wikid77 14:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Johnny can't wikicode 

message: The example locator map, rather than putting the dot in Florida, has the dot down in the corner.  Some adjustment seems needed.  (SEWilco 18:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example locator map 

message: Good lord! 200px, stop changing the infobox, everyone, please, it is stable now, and works, images shouldn't be that small in the lead anyway. IvoShandor 21:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether it is in the lead depends upon how many infoboxes there are.  It might be Teddy Roosevelt's favorite historic Civil War railroad bridge through a city in Virginia's acquisition from the District of Columbia and get an infobox from all those characteristics.  (SEWilco 21:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes, the "let's make Wikipedia look like a spread from USA Today syndrome. Multiple infoboxes are annoying as hell. I wish we could just integrate them into one, meh, I suspect the Geoboxes will make this all a problem of the past eventually. IvoShandor (talk) 12:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image size 

message: There is some kind of error when using the locator pushpin function.  Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=174093769 for an example.  The error appears to be inside the  call, specifically the line base_width = 260px.  For some reason, when this nested format is used, if no size is absolutely specified in the template, Superimpose obtains blank data, which breaks functionality.  It is because the two fields, imagesize and image_size, are nested in each other; when I tested sandboxed the template and tested it with just a size (260px) and without those fields, everything worked fine.  This is really odd, because I've seen plenty of instances where this exact setup works fine.  Any thoughts?  It appears 260px should be forced as an image size, since using another size also causes minor display problems. -- Huntster T • @ • C 08:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in locator map display 

message: :For those working on National Historic Landmarks, I've added some new parameter options to the infobox:
::Template:Infobox nrhp/NRHP nhl-ca, Template:Infobox nrhp/NRHP nhl-fl, Template:Infobox nrhp/NRHP nhld-fl
:Feel free to create more for other states as needed. And if anyone can think of a more clever way to wikicode this, please do so. I just did this for a starting measure. -Ebyabe (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be more useful to use the "locmapin" parameter to classify the National Historic Landmarks by state.  If "locmapin" is specified, it could go to "National Historic Landmarks in ".  We wouldn't have to create a number of other templates, and it would be a cleaner solution.  (Well, I think so, anyway.)  Any thoughts?  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 22:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at the code, I think I'd probably want to remove the :Category:National Historic Landmarks of the United States from  and do the categorization within this template itself ().  It avoids having to pass another parameter to  (or everything else called from nrhp_type).  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 23:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some experimentation in , the template sandbox.  See this revision to see what I did.  If I don't hear any objections, I'll add this categorization mechanism to  soon.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 23:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections here. I'm going to go ahead and remove the category from . If need be, it can always be added back. -Ebyabe (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NHL options 

message: What is the difference between the "designated", "added", and "established" parameters? The documentation only discusses added. Collectonian (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Params 

message: Would anyone object to adding :Image:HistoricPlacesNationalRegisterPlaque.JPG as an image placeholder if no image is listed within the infobox? §hep  •  ¡Talk to me! 22:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If nrhp2 template is used a map will appear as well as the image. If nrhp template is used, adding the placeholder will prevent a map from coming up. I'm in favor of maximizing information and I don't think the plaque adds anything. I'd rather people spend their time acquiring actual photographs. I spent a couple of hours last weekend searching Flickr for free images and found several useful ones.--Appraiser (talk) 14:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I just saw other pages doing it and thought I'd suggest it.  Thanks for your time. §hep  •  ¡Talk to me! 01:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place holder 

message: I noticed this template being added to Prince Hall Mystic Cemetery, with an indication that the "nearest city" is Arlington, Massachusetts.  In fact, Arlington is a town, and proud of it.
I could add an additional nearest_town parameter to the infobox, but I'm hoping there's a better solution. Matchups 02:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities and towns 

message: Please add an hCard microformat. To do this, please change:

{| class="infobox" style="width: {{{boxwidth|240px}}}; font-size: 90%;"
! colspan="2" style="font-size: larger; {{NRHP color}} text-align: center" | {{{name}}}<!--

to:

{| class="infobox vcard" style="width: {{{boxwidth|240px}}}; font-size: 90%;"
! colspan="2" style="font-size: larger; {{NRHP color}} text-align: center" | <span class="fn org">{{{name}}}</span><!--

and

{{{location}}}

to:

<span class="label">{{{location}}}</span>

(the latter class can be added to the TD if preferred); then add :Category:Templates generating hCards and Geo to the template documentation.
Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 16:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy‑melon 13:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you, again. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 13:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add microformat mark-up 

message: Seems it would be a good idea to add this as an optional parameter, so that the subject's official website (if any) can be shown in the Infobox.  JGHowes talk -  09:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 09:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  url parameter 

message: I'm noticing that the coordinates display incorrectly on both Firefox and Internet Explorer. They are duplicated and overlapping themselves. I uploaded a link so you can see what I mean, http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb293/timkloske/Coords.gif. I'm using Windows XP, 32-bit. Tkgd2007 (talk) 14:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I expect that happens if there are coords coming from two different places, such as the nrhp infobox and the bridge infobox or one of the other sources.  The fix is to not provide it more than once. - Denimadept (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

text: On that page, it's being provided by both the nrhp infobox and a Geolink template.  Pick one. - Denimadept (talk) 14:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the template was recently edited to show the coordinates in the top right corner as well as the infobox. That causes a problem at Haymarket affair, where the top corner shows the coordinates of the site of the Haymarket riot and the infobox shows the site of the Historic Landmark (the cemetery where those who were wrongly convicted were buried). Is it possible to restore the older version of the template, so the coordinates show only in the infobox? If somebody wants the coordinates to display in the top right corner, they can use one of the "coor title" templates. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: As an alternative, maybe the coordinate display in the top right corner could be made optional, so editors can "turn it off" when appropriate. I don't understand template coding well enough to make these sorts of changes myself. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, we don't need the NRHP infobox to display title coord.  We have plenty of other sources already doing this, so all this does is make a mess. - Denimadept (talk) 12:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: At Template talk:Coord#Display problem I point out that a style used in this infobox is causing the coordinate to be misplaced.  I don't know what the most general solution would be.  -- SEWilco (talk) 18:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In these cases, I've been removing the GEO template, since the nrhp template displays a nice map.--Appraiser (talk) 21:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Please don't pass false precision by using zero seconds. {[tl|coord}} allows D-M values. Try making the final separator conditional. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree. Since this template calls , editors who use this template should have the option to tweak the display option. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 21:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates display error 

message: When this template was added to Palmer House (Dayton, Oregon), everything looked fine—in fact, the original version still does.  Now there are some garbage redlinks appearing at its top. (colspan=2 Template:Infobox nrhp/NRHP Architecture, Exploration/Settlement) which first appeared when I added a value for the nrhp_type=.  The documentation for using the template could be more succinct.  Can someone help?  —EncMstr (talk) 21:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  —EncMstr (talk) 23:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  nrhp_type trouble 

message: If lat_seconds and long_seconds are omitted, an error occurs.  Omitting these is desirable, especially for historical districts (e.g. Phoenixville Historic District). A brief look at the code seems to imply that they default to 0 if omitted.  I'd guess the default needs to be 00 to avoid the error.  However since seconds are optional to , this code should be changed to omit passing seconds paramter to Coord if they are not supplied.  --J Clear (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This might be related: I have recently fixed a couple if instances of , (example) where the display was horribly broken because no seconds had been entered in the coordinates. The only way to resolve the problem in the short term was to add zero seconds, but this is obviously not an optimal solution. I reported the problem on its talk page over two weeks ago, but no-one has responded. See also  my note on WT:GEO. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Still happening. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:39, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not just make the template compatible with the  template and let that do all the work? —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 03:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what many other infoboxes do. We could add support for , run a bot to change all instances, then remove the current coding. Any objections? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 07:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coord transform broken 

message: I noticed that when an image is narrower than the available box (for example, Moore Theatre (Seattle, Washington)) ... under Firefox 3.0.3, the image is left aligned; but under IE-7 the image is centered (I can check IE-6 in the morning to see if it works there as well).  From looking at the code, it appears that centering is the correct formatting.  Is anyone more familiar with multi-browser coding who could identify what needs adjusted here to get it to work in Firefox as well?  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know the answer to the question, but why is the image size specified anyway? Just remove that and let it fill up the box.--Appraiser (talk) 14:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, that's a good question.  It looks like the person who put it in at first set the size.  I tried blanking the value, and the image wouldn't display ... so I just removed the line completely and that seems to have resolved it.  So, there seems to be some bugs in the template, but they can be avoided by just using the default value. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor image display quirk under Firefox v3.0.3 

message: I've created :Category:National Register of Historic Places templates, into which this would reasonably fit; but although I'm an administrator, I can't move this there, since I don't know the coding well enough to move it.  Could someone who knows the coding please move it to the new category from the current :Category:National Register of Historic Places?  Nyttend (talk) 13:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I made this change to the /doc file, but I don't know if it will have any effect until the template is edited.  --J Clear (talk) 17:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category change 

message: Can the following be added to the template after the "established" parameter:
|- 

and then after the "designated" field add:
|- 

Thank you. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, update documentation. Ruslik (talk) 20:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New fields 

message: When the type is contributing property, presumably the name field should be the property.  Shouldn't there be a parameter to display the parent historic district name?  mpsub seems close, but, as documented, seems not quite right.  --J Clear (talk) 12:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Offhand, that is a very reasonable suggestion.  This Talk page is not very active though.  It would be a good topic at wt:NRHP.  If you are editing/creating NRHP articles, perhaps you should consider joining wp:NRHP, too. doncram (talk) 12:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contributing property 

message: There should be an optional field in the infobox where one could add a state-level historic landmark number. Such as a California Historical Landmark number. Killiondude (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually this is implemented in new version of infobox NRHP, just deployed.  See Manzanar example in the new documentation.  Also, this Talk page is very inactive.  Perhaps it's best to post at wt:NRHP. doncram (talk) 12:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: After much discussion and preparation over at WT:NRHP, we are now ready to copy over the code from Template:Infobox nrhp2. The new code is completely backwards-compatible with this code and adds many more features, such as the ability to display both a map and an image, display local designations (state landmarks, city landmarks, etc.), and display more than one NPS designation. Also, Template:Infobox nrhp2/doc should be copied over to Template:Infobox nrhp/doc because it explains/documents the new features. Can an administrator copy over the code from these two places? If you need confirmation, the discussion can be viewed here. Thanks! --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy code from [[Template:Infobox nrhp2]] 

message: 
The template behaves badly if you have a caption but no image. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk -  19:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the code on Template:Infobox nrhp2, the test version of this infobox. Your example shows the update now; if there isn't an image, the caption won't display. This diff shows what changes need to be made. Can an administrator make the edit? (BTW, should we unprotect this template? or at least downgrade it to semi-protection, so I can edit it directly?) --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit done. --- RockMFR 18:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caption without image 

message: What if a site is destroyed, such as the Herndon Building (tornado) or Gilmer County Courthouse (demolition)?  I would assume that the date of demise would be put in the "delisted=" field.  –radiojon (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily.. to my knowledge, a site can be demolished or destroyed yet still remain on the register. I think the delisted field is only for when the site is removed from the register. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's an example: Bedell Covered Bridge - Denimadept (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Destroyed sites? 

message: Hey I am not sure where the source of the problem is, but NRHP infoboxes in Kansas are messed up, below the map display area, when map display is chosen.  Examples are Rainbow Bridge (Kansas) and Garden City High School (Kansas).  I tried several KS entries at List of RHPs in KS and see the same problem. doncram (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey never mind, i was just able to fix it, by this edit, over in the Kansas map file, which is apparently not protected and had gotten a random IP edit, probably an accident. doncram (talk) 08:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kansas map display error 

message: Sorry i could not come up with examples of the "Official Structures" in National Park Service areas earlier.  I just came across McLean House (Appomattox, Virginia), which is one, within Appomattox Court House National Historical Park.  Woodson Law Office is another, and about a dozen more are listed in the navbox within those articles.  I am not going to argue this is the most important thing to address in wikipedia, because there are not very many wikipedia articles on these separate NPS Official Structures, but ideally I think these should be handled differently, to allow the Official Structure database number, to show the parent National Historical Park name and color rather than the NRHP name and color, and in other ways.  They do not seem to me the same as contributing properties in an NRHP historic district.  I think Peterson House would be one of these, probably is in that database.  The Woodson Law Office and another were covered in an AfD, where there was discussion that eventually uncovered the NPS database for these.  There are, I recall, more than 1,000 such structures.  Many such structures do not need wikipedia articles though, while others like these ones that survived AfD seem to be okay. doncram (talk) 05:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is for some future refinement of the NRHP infobox, not for now. doncram (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Structures 

message: Please note that I've started a discussion regarding categories on this template at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Category:Historic districts in the United States.  Nyttend (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic districts categories 

message: 
In a recent edit, and despite the warning in the template's documentation, the required hCard microformat property "fn org" was lost, rendering the microformats emitted by this template invalid. To fix his, please change:
colspan=2 style="font-size:100%; text-align:center; background:"|{{{name<includeonly>|
to:
colspan=2 class="fn org" style="font-size:100%; text-align:center; background:"|{{{name<includeonly>|
Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --- RockMFR 21:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And quickly. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix microformat 

message: I edited this template's documentation to show the coordinate display property to |display=inline,title, but was reverted by User:Dudemanfellabra, with an edit summary asserting "Those aren't the default". Wikipedia-wide convention is to display coordinates in the "title" position; that way, the article is added to Google Maps and Google Earth. Is there any good reason why my edit cannot be restored? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits
:Some people feel that infoboxes shouldn't affect anything outside their boundaries.  Perhaps that editor is one of them?  You might want to point him to this discussion. - Denimadept (talk) 21:01, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I only reverted your edits because those are not the default in the infobox's code.. Your edit didn't make title display the default display; it only changed the documentation (changing the documentation doesn't change the template itself). I'm fine with changing the template to by default place the coordinates at the top of the article as well as inline, but I think we should get a few more people involved in this discussion before we change the layout of thousands of pages. Currently the default is to display coordinates only inline. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My edits made no difference, nor reference, to "the default in the infobox's code"; that's a separate issue. They were to examples of how to use an optional parameter to override that default. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The first part of your edit changed the template under the "Blank Template With ALL Possible Parameters" section. This section reflects the defaults of the template code. If there is no default, that parameter is left blank. If a parameter is to be changed in this section, it should be changed in the template as well. If the template is not changed, this section should not be changed. As for the example further down the page, I see what you mean. I didn't think when I was writing the documentation apparently. That can be changed to whatever you'd like. Sorry for the mix-up! --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 18:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, but I don't believe that the various assertions in your first second to fifth sentences, inclusive, are correct. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you like to supply me with (a) reason(s) for your disbelief? I'm the one who wrote the documentation.. and in fact coded most of the template. I'm pretty sure I know what the section is for.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My disbelief stems from my experience with hundreds of other Infobox templates on Wikipedia. And WP:OWN. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say I owned the template.. I said I coded it and knew how it worked/what it was meant for. My intention when I wrote the documentation was to make that section reflect the defaults of the parameters in the template. Regardless of whether or not "hundreds of other infobox templates" don't work that way, this one does. If you'd like to change the way it works, that's fine with me, but as of now, it's my word vs. yours, which will never get anything done, so why don't we invite more people to join this conversation – as I suggested before. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And I didn't say that you said that you owned the template. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

text: The coordinates can already be displayed in the title by using coord_display = inline, title (coord_display=title can be used too, but that would make the coordinates not display in the infobox, so that is discouraged.... at least by me). Currently the default is to only display the coords in the infobox, though, so this discussion is about changing the default to show the coords in the title too. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 16:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I have made no such denial (and neither has Andrew Mabbett). I meant what I said; no more, and no less. As to your question, I think you will find that I answered that in my first post under this heading. There will be no "unnecessary redundancy". Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What would be better would be to adopt the Wikipedia-wide convention for the coordinates to display in the infobox and in the "title" position; that way, the article is added to Google Maps and Google Earth. Which is exactly what I said here on 4 August. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate display 

message: For WP:ACCESSIBILITY by visually impaired readers, this template should support alt text as per WP:ALT. I added alt text support to the sandbox in the form of new alt= and map_alt= parameters, tested it with the test cases, and documented the new parameters. Please install this sandbox patch. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 02:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add alt text support for accessibility 

message: The map pin placed by this template appears in the wrong location.  For both the Riverside Art Museum and Mission Inn articles, the red map pin shows on the map in San Bernardino County, not Riverside County.  San Bernardino County is the large county (the largest in California) where the red map pin appears.  Riverside County is the county just below it.  Does anyone know how to resolve this problem?  Thank you.  MissionInn.Jim (talk) 02:58, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the problem was with the scaling of .  I tested this by making a fake infobox for the border monument between the USA and Mexico in Tijuana.  Then, I just monkeyed with the scaling at  until I got it right.  I also checked the northern border with Oregon, and that looks OK.  The scaling problem was probably affecting everything in southern California, with more error as you got further south.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Pin in wrong location