Template talk:Infobox journalist/Archive 1

message: It might be worth noting for newbies that the Image paramester requires a value of the format .  If someone feels like modifying the template, I personally think it would make more sense for the template to add the double-brackets, rather than the user, since they're required in all cases.
It also might be worthwhile for one or more of the creators of this template to put together something on this talk page explaining the intended use of the parameters.  Especially "occupation": I mean, isn't that somewhat redundant to the fact that this is supposedly for Journalists?  Or are we assuming that all journalists need another job because the pay sucks so bad?  --Geoff Capp 21:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image param 

message: 
(shoot up a signal flare)
I think I've found a bug in the template. Check the Alexander Cockburn article: "birth name" displays twice, once at the top of the first section and again at the bottom. The template appears to be correctly invoked in the article. +ILike2BeAnonymous 05:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. —Centrx→talk • 05:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bug: field displayed twice 

message: Alias should not show as "Other names" but as "Aliases". __meco 16:47, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alias should not show as "Other names" 

message: The orange bars are too jarringly bright. A more pastel-type color would fit better with WP's longstanding (muted) design aesthetic. Badagnani (talk) 09:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks ;) Jack Merridew 05:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orange bars 

message: The "Circumstances" bar doesn't make any sense. Please change this to some other clearer and more appropriate term. Badagnani (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Circumstances"

message: For someone who is familiar with wiki syntax, I suggest the following two edits:
1. Per the above comment, the "circumstances" bar makes no sense, at least to American English speakers. It should be eliminated entirely.
2. Four separate fields for birthplace, birthdate, date of death, and place of death is extraneous. As with (most?) other infoboxes, there should be two fields, born and died, which encompass these four pieces of information.
--MagneticFlux (talk) 21:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions: 

message: Generally I like the use of templates but when I filled this in the "(s)" section wrapped to the line below.  Also what is the point of "salary" and "networth"?  Seems non-encyclopedic.  Mfields1 (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Belief(s) and Notable Credit(s) does not display properly, other items

message: when this template was updated to include domestic partner, either the documentation (domesticpartner) or the parameter (domestic_partner) was entered incorrectly. i believe most infoboxes do not use the underscore. --emerson7 07:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: - needs the underscore in the template. SkierRMH (talk) 00:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  domestic partner 

message: Should we add a parameter for a reporters affiliations/organizations they have worked for? Scapler (talk) 01:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Affiliations? 

message: Requesting sync with the new sandbox to allow for the  parameter to be omitted if it's the same as the article title. No changes to deployed instances. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So instead of a name in the orange bar you get just the orange bar without the name? Garion96 (talk) 18:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Errr, no. If you don't include a name attribute, it gets picked up from the article title. Most high-profile infobox templates do this already. See the test cases for an imperfect example. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Ah, makes sense. Done. Garion96 (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allow inheritance of name from page title 

message: Could someone please add a "Residence" field, like in ?--Blargh29 (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any comments from others about whether this is needed/desired? Or has there been a discussion elsewhere? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:07, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Deactivated pending response. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if there is any other talk of this, but I happen to this it would be useful. In fact, I was surprised that it didn't exist before.--Blargh29 (talk) 20:13, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was also very surprised not to see this in place. Please add it.--Shakehandsman (talk) 05:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Residence field 

message: Requesting sync with sandbox to convert this to a vastly simpler, more consistent and easier to maintain -based syntax. Neglibile output changes. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. - Trevor MacInnis contribs 04:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox conversion 

message: Can anyone add a section for awards and nationality. Thnx.--23prootie (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Enabling, sandbox has been updated to remove the inappropriate  and  attributes and add  and . Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with removal of attributes but don't see benefit on adding these two. Awards for instance have been removed from Template:Infobox actor. It was getting excessive. Garion96 (talk) 12:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the awards field is a great idea. I would like to see a "residence" field in addition to a "nationality" field.--Blargh29 (talk) 12:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

text:  Awards aren't suitable in all cases, but awards in journalism tend to be pretty prestigious things; journalists are often defined by them, in a way that actors aren't. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Please add nationality. It is kinda basic compared to "ethnicity" and "relatives". I feel this is really important. —  Cargoking  talk  13:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have readded the editprotected template. I think adding nationality is quite reasonable. —  Cargoking  talk  16:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

text: —  Cargoking  talk  21:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality and Awards field 

message: The parameter  is not well named. To avoid confusion, I'd like to have it renamed here (first by duplication, then a BOTREQ to change all instances of the template using that parameter, then removal of the original), to the more standard , as used in . Any comments? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:04, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. BOTREQuest filed. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Cheers, Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

text: * --CapitalR (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic 

message: Hello, I have a suggestion. Is it possible to add a "Years active" field to this template? I noticed that most infobox templates (including actor, musician, even the basic person) include a years active parameter.  Tinton5 (talk) 00:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Support as standardising on generic parameters from . Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:39, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The proper image field (like in Infobox Person) and an employer could also be factored in. Most journalists are not free-lance. —  Cargoking  talk  16:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be better to add any of this template's unique fields to  and convert instances of this template to that one; perhaps by redirection, otherwise by making this template call it. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:56, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You could say the same about Infobox Actor. This one is for journalists, like the other is for actors. —  Cargoking  talk  18:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed; and I have previously done so. In fact, all the parameters in this infobox are already available in . Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The orange from here is quite distinctive. I think Infobox Person should have a colour option like in Infobox Music. (You can steal that if you want, and suggest it at Infobox Person. I would do it myself, but you seem to be quite familiar with it.) —  Cargoking  talk  20:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Done.  The  is now added.  Let me know if there are more fields. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: This template needs image size, because many large pictures take up the whole page if they aren't shrunk.Schnapps17 (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  imagesize 

message: Hi everyone,
When I look at Rachel Maddow, I see that Religious belief(s) and Notable credit(s) are word wrapped before the (s).
I suggest the template be changed from:

| label14    = Religious belief(s)
| data14     = {{{religion|}}}
| label15    = Years active
| data15     = {{{years_active|}}}
| label16    = Notable credit(s)
| data16     = {{{credits|}}}

to:

| label14    = Religious {{nowrap|belief(s)}}
| data14     = {{{religion|}}}
| label15    = Years active
| data15     = {{{years_active|}}}
| label16    = Notable {{nowrap|credit(s)}}
| data16     = {{{credits|}}}

so that this anomaly does not happen.
--Kevinkor2 (talk) 10:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  I also added the nowrap to "spouse(s)", although that probably won't be an issue since it's so short. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 07:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yay! That looks much better! Thank you, Plastikspork. --Kevinkor2 (talk) 12:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  nowrap 

message: I noticed here that the "religion=" parameter in the infobox template transcluded as "Religious belief(s)". That is probably more often incorrect than correct. Just because someone is born into a religion doesn't mean they "believe" everything in that religion, which it would imply. Even practicing a religion doesn't mean the person believes everything in it, unless they come out and say so. In the example I reverted, not only has that (BLP) subject declared that they "are not religious", but they drink wine and even write about wine, in extreme contradiction to the "belief(s)" of that religion. I imagine someone innocently added it because the subject was born into that religion. For the sake of simplicity, and so other editors don't innocently add the "religion=" parameter, can "religion" just mean.... "religion" when the infobox transcludes? I also couldn't find where to change this. First Light (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the strange wording is an attempt to suggest that the person has not necessarily signed up to the religion (perhaps that religion does not accept the person), but is an indication of how the person is aligned. There have been long discussions about  where the religion field used to say "Religious stance". See Template talk:Infobox scientist#Religion (and other sections on that page). The religion field was finally removed from that template on the basis that, particularly for a scientist, it is not appropriate to label a person unless the label is very well supported by reliable sources and the published views of the person—the more nuanced positions that many scientists have regarding religion are more properly dealt with in the article, and there should not be an attempt to find a word to summarize the situation. Before the label was removed, there were absurd edits like adding "Anglican" to Richard Dawkins on the basis that he was brought up in that religion, followed by excruciating discussion about what kind of atheist he was. I don't like unreliable labels in general, but have no particular feelings at the moment regarding this infobox (my comment is just some background). To change the text, an admin would have to edit the protected template (label14). For that to occur, a longish discussion (probably an WP:RFC) would be needed to establish consensus. Johnuniq (talk) 02:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Removing any "religion" parameter altogether would really be my first choice. It is so problematic to essentially "tag" someone as this religion or that, when it is so nuanced, as you can see from my example. I don't see much difference in that regard between scientists and journalists. Short of an RfC for complete removal, I guess an alternative would be removing it on an individual basis, when it violates WP:BLP, which it will probably do most of the time. The only exception is when someone strongly self-identifies that their "beliefs" are such-and-such religion. That narrows the use of that parameter significantly. Did it take an RfC to remove it from the scientist infobox? Thanks for the help. First Light (talk) 03:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

text: P.S. I see from browsing those links you provided that it just took some discussion to remove it from the scientist infobox. Thanks, First Light (talk) 03:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  religion ≠ Religious belief(s) 

message: This is an edit request to allow for image resizing, like the parameter in the parent template :Template:Infobox person.  Previous requests at Template_talk:Infobox_journalist#imagesize have gone unanswered.  I realize that there are editors/developers who prefer templates to use a standard image size and to allow for users to control their desired sizing in the preferences, however, while this sounds great in theory, in practice it doesn't work and there is no such template standard at this time.  Page design and layout must take into account readers, not just logged-in editors who have variable preferences. Viriditas (talk) 01:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Image size support was added five months ago in this edit. Use image_size. For what it's worth, using the default image size works perfectly well, which is why it's been so warmly welcomed as it's been rolled out to the majority of high-profile templates in the last year or two. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested edit 

message: Please add , linking to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 February 22#Template:Infobox journalist. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request