Template talk:Infobox observatory

message: The template can currently cope with up to six telescopes. If more telescopes need to be on the template, then please let me know (or add support for them yourself). Mike Peel 22:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of telescopes 

message: I have removed this template from the article Mount Wilson Observatory because it insisted on importing false information from Wikidata, namely, that the 200-inch Hale telescope was located at Mount Wilson. This template should redesigned so that it won't import any telescopes from Wikidata if any telescope parameters are completed in the template. Otherwise false or duplicate information may be imported from Wikidata. Any normal user will be mystified as to the templates behavior if information is being mashed together from two different sources. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi . It looks like you fixed this by this edit on Wikidata, so I've added the infobox back to the article. Given the edit timing, I suspect you might have been seeing the telescope mentioned in the infobox even after you removed it from Wikidata, which might have been due to caching (add ?action=purge to the URL of an article to completely refresh it). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The infobox needs to be fixed so that if even a single telescope is filled in in the template. Otherwise the listing becomes redundant at best, with telescopes being listed as a comma-separated list after "Telescopes" (with the word Telescopes over to the side of the infobox) and after the word Telescopes, centered in the infobox, with the telescopes listed each on its own line. Jc3s5h (talk) 20:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

text: I believe the present behavior is not in accord with Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2. I as whether this is going to be fixed by the person/people who have been developing this template. If I do not see an affirmative response, I will open an RfC to press this matter. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, telescope lists from Wikidata will no longer show in infoboxes if telescope1_type has been set as per this edit. That's not great, as I'm trying to transition this template to use information from Wikidata in a more compact way than before (and I originally created this template along with the existing structure way back when), but it might help smooth the transition process. I don't appreciate threats: please don't make them in future. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've spent a bit of time updating the Mount Wilson Observatory infobox, Wikidata entry(s), and Commons categories. They all still need work - please can you help with this? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It would seem that if the edit works as intended, the matter is settled. I will have a look at the Mount Wilson page. I visited there once, way back when, but I'm sure a lot has changed since then. Jc3s5h (talk) 00:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Can't suppress false or confusing information from Wikidata

message: Please see Talk:Royal Observatory, Greenwich#Latitude and longitude invisible to API. I've never used the API, but an editor reports that the API does not provide any coordinates from the Royal Observatory, Greenwich article. This might possibly be related to the fact that the Infobox observatory in this article does not directly contain the coordinates, rather, the coordinates are imported from Wikidata. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is something that needs raising at Template talk:Coord. It may be that it's not generating the necessary metadata when values are fetched from Wikidata. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not being an editor of Infobox observatory, I don't intend to be the one to raise it. I have no first hand knowledge that Infobox observatory calls, invokes, or whatever Template:Coord. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:36, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough! I've now raised it there. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Possibly related issue at Royal Observatory, Greenwich talk page

message: I can't understand exactly how this template is interacting with wikidata, but something seems to be wrong in that the API serves up the map image instead of the infobox photo (eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&format=xml&prop=pageimages&titles=Sherwood%20Observatory), for articles that use this infobox. Regular infoboxes ignore the map and give the photo instead. Is this a bug, or have I misunderstood how infoboxes work? --Gapfall (talk) 17:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is something that needs reporting at phabricator. I don't know how the API works, or how it chooses the page images to show, but it sounds like it's an issue with how the image is fetched from Wikidata and how the API interprets that. Maybe  might know if there's something that can be fixed in the modules here, but otherwise it needs the API devs to have a look at it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   I've started a phabricator ticket for this and the coordinate issue. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   Thank you! --Gapfall (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template serving the map instead of the photo to API 

message: If Wikidata has multiple images, this template throws a redlink instead of showing one or all images. This happens fairly frequently, see e.g. the current versions of Lick Observatory, Mount Wilson Observatory, Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex, ... Fram (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing this out. It should now be fairly systematically fixed by using getPreferredValue rather than getValue. Although ideally we would set a maximum of 1 value to be retrieved, so I've requested this at Module_talk:WikidataIB#Maximum_number_of_values_to_retrieve.3F. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template can't deal with multiple images 

message: If the following differentiation[1] between these two words is satisfactory, I suggest using the former instead of the latter.
[1] https://english.stackexchange.com/a/16747  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.117.201.26 (talk) 08:43, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be rather confusing as 'elevation' in astronomy also refers to the vertical angle that the telescope is at. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use word 'elevation' instead of 'altitude' 

message: and  have both recently been updated to automatically show dynamic mapframe maps by default. I am proposing to similarly show such maps by default for this template, with the same optional parameters to adjust the size, frame center point, initial zoom level, and marker icon; and to similarly allow the mapframe map to be turned off using . See Template:Infobox building#Mapframe maps and Template talk:Infobox building#Change to the map parameter so Kartographer works for further information.  - Evad37 [talk] 15:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mapframe maps? 

message: I just extended support for  to the coordinates and location maps for Paul G. Comba.  this required adding support for qid to Module:Coordinates, passing qid to  and , and adding support for qid to .  let me know if this causes any problems. Frietjes (talk) 14:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for making those changes. Ideally there should only be one infobox on a page... You might want to use "child=yes" to embed this infobox in the main one there, or consider splitting out the observatory into a separate article. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:12, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mike Peel, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prescott Observatory. Frietjes (talk) 15:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I didn't see that in time. Ah well. Mike Peel (talk) 23:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended support for qid 

message: Hello! The documentation says that "established" uses  while "closed" uses . I think it would be better to use the following properties in order of fallback:
* Established: , , 
* Closed: , , 
I don't think start/end time should be preferred because they are not very specific and are used somewhat differently (such as for when something comes into effect). Tol | talk | contribs 21:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Start/end dates