Template talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 2

message: When class=Cat is aplied the following text will appear in template.
"This article has been rated as Cat-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]"
The problem is that quality scale does not provide any info about Cat-Class.--Poa 18:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It just means "category". Could somebody add a line to the quality scale? --kingboyk 19:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way similar situation with class=Dab and class=Template. And just wondering if there any example where class=Template was used?--Poa 22:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing reference

message: I added |attention=yes on Talk:Toni Price so that it says . Apparently, that added the page to  :Category:Biography articles needing attention. I expected it to be automatically added to :Category:Musicians work group articles needing attention. Did I miss something, or could it be the template isn't fully working? Cheers, BNutzer 15:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bump! Can you answer this one too please Plange? Sorry :) --kingboyk 20:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, this has been added to  -- will port it once I know rest of code (for below) is okay --02:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: all okay? Need to get it moved to here and implemented before any more edits are made --plange 15:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you've tested it and it works, take it live. It's not as if it can't be rolled back. I don't have time to run tests right now. --kingboyk 16:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It works-- the above was easy, it was the BRoy one I was worried about, but I'll go ahead and add... --plange 16:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: |attention=yes

message: I came across a page using the parameter "|musician-work-group=", but I hadn't ever run into that before.  It's still working, so why isn't it listed on the main template page as an optional parameter like the others.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Template instructions updated. -- Avi 17:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, thanks!  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Avi! --plange 17:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  musicians? 

message: When adding "|musician-work-group=yes" to a WPBiography tag on Talk:Thomas Anders that already contained "|a&e-work-group=yes", the result was that a&e did not show on the talk page anymore, neither did the a&e categories. It also shows on this page in #Example_2:_full: a&e is invisible, so the effect seems to occur only with a&e? Is that wanted? I have found it irritating, since it would generate some kind of competition between the two work-groups. Regards, BNutzer 12:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's by design, yes (because musicians is a subset of arts). That's not to say the design can't be reviewed should you wish to propose it. --kingboyk 13:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The music group does not list Arts and Entertainment in its parentage. Arts and Entertainment has not actually listed WikiProject Musicians as a Descendant WikiProject. I think think the present WPBiography template setup is correct since WikiProject Musicians is in fact its own WikiProject. -- Jreferee 18:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  musicians override arts and entertainment? 

message: The "Usage" section on the main page states: living: Answer yes if the subject is living; remove line if subject is dead. Shouldn't that be Answer no if subject is dead? Cheers, BNutzer 20:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doing either performs the same function, so removing the line just cleans up a little bit of clutter.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 20:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that a bit short-sighted? An article with  is not at all necessarily an article about a dead person from what I have seen (and tagged), whereas an article with living=no should most likely be about a dead person. I think the flag should allow three different results: yes, no, and unknown==not set. BNutzer 21:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No objection; that makes sense, I agree.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 21:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parameter living= 

message: The Sports and games workgroup uses :Image:Soccerball.jpg as its icon.  That file is a JPG file and has a white background.  I think that the icon should be changed to :Image:Soccerball.svg, which is transparant, is smaller in file size, and is in the public domain.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  04:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it --plange 16:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports and Games workgroup icon 

message: Have a look at Talk:William Shakespeare: The link to the peer review page doesn't work. I've tried to fix it, but, alas, failed! Vanished user talk 15:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: > Works for me? --plange 16:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. Maybe my fix worked, but took a while to update? Or maybe it was just one of those funny temporary bugs. Vanished user talk 19:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, just did a test by temporarily making a new copy of the template with the old code (then requesting a speedy delete): My changes are, for some reason, necessary for it to work properly. Ah, well! Vanished user talk 19:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Weird, I wonder what had broken it, as it's worked in the past... Thanks! --plange 22:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review Broken

message: In the template, on articles which have had an archived peer review, the link is broken.  On Talk:Frank S. Scott, the archival link inserts a superfluous colon before the archived page name -- thereby leading to a redlink page.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears it because of this link code :, specifically the colon in the middle which stays there even if there is no namespace. : could be removed but then if a portal was reviewed then the link would be broken for it. So anyone know what to do?  - Tutmosis 21:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a similar fix to the way the "request for a peer review" code works.  It seems to work on my end now.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  21:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:BIO peer review 

message: === Including photo requests? ===
How about a new "needs-photo" parameter? I'm thinking it should add :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people (same effect as adding ), or more spesific subcat(s) if one or more workgroups are set in the template (:Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of artists and entertainers for example). I've started trying to subcat the huge :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs category and I've noticed a large number of these articles are biographies, so I think it would be benefitial to bake the photo request into this template, that way it can "piggyback" on the workgroup data and save some categorisation effort. --Sherool (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent idea! I'd done something similar for the WikiProject Virginia banner, so will test it in my sandbox before implementing here --plange 03:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been playing around in my own sandbox and it seems to work well with all the various workgroup parameters, so I went ahead and implemented the "needs-photo" parameter. --Sherool (talk) 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the examples above to use the "needs-photo" parameter.  Good job with it.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  04:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

text: * Also, many of these new editors do not know about talk pages.  If this parameter is yes'ed, then perhaps something can appear at the bottom of the article page to let the editor know to go to the talk page and read it similar to a note appearing on the bottom of the article page to show that the article is a stub. -- Jreferee 16:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requests for additional parameters

message: How about a new "needs-photo" parameter? I'm thinking it should add :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people (same effect as adding ), or more spesific subcat(s) if one or more workgroups are set in the template (:Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of artists and entertainers for example). I've started trying to subcat the huge :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs category and I've noticed a large number of these articles are biographies, so I think it would be benefitial to bake the photo request into this template, that way it can "piggyback" on the workgroup data and save some categorisation effort. --Sherool (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent idea! I'd done something similar for the WikiProject Virginia banner, so will test it in my sandbox before implementing here --plange 03:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been playing around in my own sandbox and it seems to work well with all the various workgroup parameters, so I went ahead and implemented the "needs-photo" parameter. --Sherool (talk) 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the examples above to use the "needs-photo" parameter.  Good job with it.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  04:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Including photo requests? 

message: How about a new "needs-Persondata" parameter?  This is step 4 of the  WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article.
====Christmas wish====
If the article has an infobox but does not have a Persondata metadata, is there a way to have a bot create the Persondata metadata from the information in the infobox?  That is what I would like for Christmas.  Thank you.  -- Jreferee 17:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia:Persondata

message: If the article has an infobox but does not have a Persondata metadata, is there a way to have a bot create the Persondata metadata from the information in the infobox?  That is what I would like for Christmas.  Thank you.  -- Jreferee 17:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Christmas wish

message: Every article created on Wikipedia passes through Special:Newpages.  At least half appear to be biographies.  Of those not speedy deleted (which many are), most are written by first time Wikipedia users who have no clue about biographical layout.  Many of these articles eventually are passed onto AfD because they editors do not know ways to Wikify them.  To give better guidance to these new Wikipedia editors and to reduce the load on AfD, how about a new "needs-biographical layout" parameter (see Template:Biography or something like a "This article may benefit from editing based on these 11 steps."? -- Jreferee 16:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Also, many of these new editors do not know about talk pages.  If this parameter is yes'ed, then perhaps something can appear at the bottom of the article page to let the editor know to go to the talk page and read it similar to a note appearing on the bottom of the article page to show that the article is a stub. -- Jreferee 16:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Layout for biographical articles

message: I'd STILL like to support the comment about "public relations manipulation" after coming across an absolutely terrible PR text dump in a minor politician's page. 68.39.174.238 01:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Activepol 

message: Why is this template so big it's at least twice the size of the average talk page banner (Gnevin 09:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even now, with the living tag it is still bigger than most. Some projects with large templates shrink the text slightly, still for legibility but considerate of the talkpage. Can we shrkink this down to 90% or something using <div style="font-size:70% ? Chris 00:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size 

message: The auto parameter instructions state that "This parameter is for the use of bots. It calls the ."  However, there is no indication on how to make an entry for this parameter.  Do you enter "yes" to call the bot or is the parameter for use by the bot? -- Jreferee 15:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This parameter is only used when a user has there bot tagging pages.  A few users have a bot that will automatically tag the page as a stub if there is a stub template on the article's page.  The auto parameter is just a reference to indicate that the article was assessed based on the stub template.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  22:12, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto parameter 

message: The instructions state This parameter is used for bios whose title is in the first part of the article, i.e. Prince George of England, you can instead have listas=George of England, Prince -- so that it will show up in the G's...  Where does the article show up in the G's?  Will the article show up in the G's for every category listed at the bottom of the article without the need to added a piped extension to the category such as Category:kings|George of England, Prince? -- Jreferee 16:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *OK, see New parameter above. The explanation on the template article page should be clarified to explain that the article show up in the G's for every category listed at the bottom of the article without the need to added a piped extension to the category.-- Jreferee 17:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Please refer to the discussion below. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 15:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listas parameter 

message: I have noticed that lately most articles (their talk pages, to be precise) are listed in categories as if they were starting with "T" (due to being "T"alk pages?), see e.g. :Category:Start-Class_biography_articles. I doubt that is a wanted effect, is it? Cheers, BNutzer 15:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refer to the discussion below. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 15:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Almost everything listed under "T"? 

message: The class parameter states that Descriptions of the options can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment#Quality scale.  However, Dab, Template, and Cat are not on that Quality scale.  The description may need to be updated to explain what Dab, Template, and Cat are. -- Jreferee 17:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also see above discussion, confusing reference. -- Jreferee 17:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check the page again, I added a little comment about each of them.  I also added  with the template-class to provide an example.  – Heaven's Wrath   Talk  22:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class parameter 

message:  In the coding, there is currently this bit regarding infoboxes: An appropriate Wikipedia:Infobox templatesinfobox needs to be added to this article, or the current infobox needs to be updated. Please refer to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Infoboxeslist of biography infoboxes for further information.
Can this please be tweaked to replace both instances of "needs" with "may need". This is to avoid prejudicing the discussion that should take place at each article on whether an infobox is appropriate or not, rather than implying that there is a rigid rule that every biographical article must have an infobox. Thanks. Carcharoth 18:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Proto::► 19:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Carcharoth 23:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tweak of wording regarding infoboxes 

message: Since some people might be appropriate for more than one group and of differing priorities for those groups, it would be convenient to be able to do something like:
:
instead of having to clutter up talk pages with two separate templates. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sometimes different projects assess in different ways. Also, overlap between projects is not always clear. I suspect it is best not to try and merge them this way - messes up assessments and bot tracking of the assessments. See also Template:ArticleHistory (now in use), Template:Multiproject (under development - see concerns on talk page) and a mock-up at User:Raul654/multiproject. Carcharoth 01:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple work groups/Single template? 

message: : I've moved this conversation from the above to generate more input on it.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 22:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be possible. Is this needed, and is there a consensus on adding this? --PhantomS 22:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  free-image stipulation 

message: The present instructions state: "living: Answer yes if the subject is living; remove line if subject is dead."  The omission of the living parameter line also could mean that the living/dead status has not been assessed.  Given the importance of WP:BLP and a need to prevent duplicate efforts, instead of removing the line of the subject is dead, I believe that the Answer no should be inserted and that the template instructions be revised to say this.  Please change the instructions if there is a concensus. -- Jreferee 22:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 03:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I also agree as Jreferee says, if we don't know if the person is dead or alive, it would be best to err on the side of caution and presume that he/she is alive unless it's impossible for them to be alive (e.g. born any time prior to 1850 or flourished over 120 years ago) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kimonandreou (talk • contribs) 13:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's totally unnecessary. living=no and a non-existent living= are functionally identical. Furthermore, empty params are just taking up database space. The instructions are fine as they are; WP:BLP is not something to get paranoid about. --kingboyk 20:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: That said; living=yes should probably be used if the subject might be alive but nobody is sure. --kingboyk 20:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The WP:BLP tag on the talk page could be the difference between a lawsuit being filed and not filed and between whether Wikipedia itself gets named in a lawsuit or only the person who posted the libelous material. Also, if the living=no is not on the talk page, then how would someone else know that the living status already has been assessed? As for taking up database space, I'll defer to kingboyk on this and leave it to his judgement. On a similar note, I was taken to task here for using an expanded WPBiography template rather than a "compressed" WPBiography template. Can't please everybody. -- Jreferee 18:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose. (The database issue is trivial btw). I'm not worried though, if it were a Foundation issue - i.e. important - we'd have heard about it by now. I suggest folks just carry on with their personal preferred way :) --kingboyk 19:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Living parameter

message: (partial repost from above)
===Wikipedia:Persondata===
How about a new "needs-Persondata" parameter?  This is step 4 of the  WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. If the article has an infobox but does not have a Persondata metadata, is there a way to have a bot create and locate the Persondata metadata from the information in the infobox? -- Jreferee 19:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could create a  template specific for biographies? RHB Talk - Edits 20:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template might be good. I've just been making threads on talk pages about the 11 steps.  See, for example, Talk:Shigeo_Hirose -- Jreferee 18:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Resolution -- Post thread on the talk page re the 11 steps, which includes Persondata step. -- Jreferee 20:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requests for additional parameters

message: How about a new "needs-Persondata" parameter?  This is step 4 of the  WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. If the article has an infobox but does not have a Persondata metadata, is there a way to have a bot create and locate the Persondata metadata from the information in the infobox? -- Jreferee 19:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia:Persondata

message: Every article created on Wikipedia passes through Special:Newpages.  At least half appear to be biographies.  Of those not speedy deleted (which many are), most are written by first time Wikipedia users who have no clue about biographical layout.  Many of these articles eventually are passed onto AfD because they editors do not know ways to Wikify them.  To give better guidance to these new Wikipedia editors and to reduce the load on AfD, how about a new "needs-biographical layout" parameter (see Template:Biography or something like a "This article may benefit from editing based on these 11 steps."? Alternatively, perhaps the bot can create a new thread, such as I did for Talk:Yuichi_Komano, Talk:Yuji_Hamano, and other articles. -- Jreferee
::Could create a  template specific for biographies? RHB Talk - Edits 20:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template might be good. I've just been making threads on talk pages about the 11 steps.  See, for example, Talk:Shigeo_Hirose -- Jreferee 18:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Resolution -- Post thread on the talk page re the 11 steps, which includes Persondata step. -- Jreferee 20:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Layout for biographical articles