Template talk:DEFAULTSORT

message: there is no "widespread confusion".
:Successfully prevented, then. --Stemonitis 13:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "to help prevent widespread confusion" ? 

message: Should articles that currently have all categories individually sorted (such as article of names sorted with last name first) be edited to instead use this template or the magic word? Or does it really matter which method is used? — CobraWiki ( jabber | stuff ) 20:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't looked at the Mediawiki code, but I imagine there's no great difference performance wise. My approach would be to switch to the magic word if adding a new category, but don't bother updating if you're not making any other changes. --kingboyk 21:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically it doesn't matter, but it's more convenient to work once DEFAULTSORT is there. You can use my user script at User:DStoykov/defaultsort.js to switch to DEFAULTSORT with a single click. However, as kingboyk said, don't do it unless you have made some other changes as well - this would clutter the history, Special:Recentchanges, etc..--DStoykov 18:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To convert or not to convert 

message: I edited a page which already contained DEFAULTSORT in, then shortly after made another edit.  You can see the diffs here: .  The only edit I made for the newer version was to add an endspoiler tag...and yet the DEFAULTSORT seems to have been applied, removed, and also removed my previous changes. I also didn't change the "Dead body|corpse" wikilink...what's going on?? Burns flipper 15:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A template cannot be responsible for such changes, as far as I can see, because they are not evaluated while editing, and contain no executable code. I believe I'm right in saying that you use Lupin's popups, which is a much more likely cause of the odd behaviour, although there may also be other causes that I've overlooked. --Stemonitis 16:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does adding this to a page remove recent page changes? 

message: Please make one; I tire of having to type "DEFAULTSORT" in all-caps all the time (and have others correct it since "defaultsort:" doesn't work). Thanks. -Eep² 12:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A lower-case template already exists, but that would require a pipe symbol rather than a colon. Since  was added to the edit box (below the "Do not copy text from other websites without permission. It will be deleted." notice when editing a page), I haven't typed it out once, because one can now insert it with a single mouse click (requires JavaScript, I believe). --Stemonitis 12:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MediaWiki software limitation? Lame. -Eep² 07:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  lowercase version 

message: Please add new interwiki for :fr:Modèle:DEFAULTSORT
  fr:Modèle:DEFAULTSORT
(I've already updated the French and Russian interwikis.)
62.147.36.186 13:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for letting us know. --Stemonitis 13:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add new interwiki 

message: How exactly is this supposed to work? I just added the template to Jake Peavy.  When I went to look at :Category:San Diego Padres players, Peavy was displayed as "Jake Peavy" and under the P section.    Am i correctly assuming that these articles are still displayed by page name but sorted by the defaultsort? Long levi 21:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, neither piping nor this template change the name under which articles show up in the category, only their sort order. --GargoyleMT 03:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

text: *Awesome! Thanks for the reply Long levi 04:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this working properly? 

message: One advantage of using templates over magic words is that you can easily track use of the magic word via the template. You could, for instance, create a category called :Category:Articles using the DEFAULTSORT magic word via the DEFAULTSORT template, or look at the transclusion list (in what links here) for this template. I am unaware of any equivalent way to do this for DEFAULTSORT. Is there a way to list all articles using DEFAULTSORT, and conversely to list all articles that lack DEFAULTSORT? Carcharoth 12:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Put simply, no. Using the magic word directly (as is generally considered desirable) precludes the ability to track its use, just like other magic words, such as __NOTOC__ or parser functions. It might be something that the developers could introduce, but in the absence of a compelling reason to do so, I wouldn't recommend suggesting it (I'm sure they've got more important things to work on). The intention of the template wasn't to add extra functionality, but merely to allow for typos, and to provide a place for documentation. If a similar template were to be extended (e.g. with a category), I think it would be best to give it a different title such as Template:defsort to prevent confusion. --Stemonitis 13:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for confirming that. I would have thought that this function would be desirable, at least for biographical articles. It would be an immensely useful clean-up category to be able to find all the biographical articles (at a first pass, those with  on their talk pages) that lack DEFAULTSORT. AWB could suggest a defaultsort based on the category pipes, and those without category pipes could similarly have AWB suggest a defaultsort based on the article title. You'd need humans to decide on the sortkey, because, as you've said elsewhere, sorting can be a very complex business. Bots and software should be used to identify candidates for clean up, and humans can then carry out the clean up. This would be one way to identify candidates for clean up. Possibly the only way to do it at present is to use a bot to read pages and output a list of those lacking DEFAULTSORT. Using the template to provide a category doesn't work because people should be using the magic word, not the template. What is needed is a category inside the magic word... Or a "what links here" thing for defaultsort. Carcharoth 13:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know you said not to hassle the developers, but I did post this at the technical Village Pump, to see what people think. I am also going to try some other possibilities. Carcharoth 13:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorising pages that use DEFAULTSORT 

message: Please move the non-template material to Template:DEFAULTSORT/doc (see Template:Fact and Template:Fact/doc for example) so that documentation can be edited without affecting template.  Then add  to the top of the template, per WP:TFD. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 23:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template has been unprotected by . Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominated for deletion; dox fix. 

message: On one page, it just came up with a blue box with the options "view" and "edit", and then </noinclude> after. I removed the latter, but it still seemed that clicking on view or edit did not work properly. -- Beardo 01:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No it wasn't working properly, as the contents of the template were partially deleted when the TFD notice was removed, which I have now fixed. Also, please do not use this template but use  so that the magic word is used directly. Thanks, mattbr 17:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this working properly 

message: There are several bots that do defaultsort where the existing category sort keys are in agreement. I know the operator of User:SmackBot has an approved task to do DEFAULTSORT for people stubs (see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SmackBot XIII), but that only applies when "there is an unambiguous sort key given to existing categories". There is also Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BOTijo 5, but that too has the restriction "Only put DEFAULTSORT when all categories in article have the same SORT".
Essentially, these restrictions is because a human is needed to judge whether the name is of the form "GIVEN NAME, FAMILY NAME". You might think that the last name is the family name, but sometimes you have double surname that are not hyphenated, or you have some Asian names (and other countries as well) that are in the form "FAMILY NAME, GIVEN NAME", so they need to be sorted by the first word in the the title, not the last. It is possible that the category sort keys are wrong, but in that case the bots are only perpetuating errors, not introducing new ones.
I'm currently trying to gather more information on whether other bots exist and whether AWB has a DEFAULTSORT suggestion option. A lot of the information of DEFAULTSORT is scattered around different pages. Might it be an idea to have Wikipedia:DEFAULTSORT, as not everyone thinks to look here? The closest thing at the moment is Wikipedia:Categorization#Setting a default sort key. Could that be spun out into a subpage and bot details added? Carcharoth 18:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DEFAULTSORTing bots and Wikipedia namespace page 

message: I've noticed this being added to a few talk pages. Personally, I don't see a point to this. It seems overly bureaucratic and picky, really no reason to do it. Other opinions? Wizardman 01:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defaultsort on talk pages 

message: Template:Lifetime --Bejnar (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: This question arises because of the use of :Template:DEFAULTSORT.  What is the English convention for alphabetization of names with a single letter following a given name?  Some examples are Stevie B, Marga T, Eric B., and Schooly D.  My contention is that, since these single letters are not legal surnames and, in some cases are not even derived from the surname initial (Stevie B and Schooly D), they should not be used for alphabetization.  So, Stevie B would be sorted under Stevie, not B, Marga T under Marga, not T.  If you have some input, please discuss it at WT:MOSBIO. —  AjaxSmack  01:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabetization of names with a single letter following a given name 

message: A simple question: Why are the first letters of all (or most) words entered as the sort key of  frequently capitalized without any regard to proper English or even the name of the article? Here are a few examples, with the word(s) in question bolded:
*On "List of The Penguins of Madagascar episodes," the DEFAULTSORT is Penguins Of Madagascar Episodes instead of Penguins of Madagascar episodes
*On "List of Governors of Connecticut," the DEFAULTSORT is Connecticut, List Of Governors Of instead of Connecticut, List of Governors of
*On "The Wizard of Oz (1939 film)," the DEFAULTSORT is Wizard of Oz (1939 Film), The instead of Wizard of Oz (1939 film), The
Just wanted to know if there was any reason for this, if it really is necessary to retain improper capitalization (for the record, many articles do use the correct capitalization already), and if I might be missing something. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 21:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It can vary based on category but in terms of alpha-sorting, wikipedia recognizes capital letters before lower-case ones, so "Z" comes before "a". So, one may want to set defaultsorts to get around this. As an example (not that these two subjects would ever appear in the same category, but if they did), Battle Royale would come before Battle of the Bulge without defaultsorting. Another option could always be to defaultsort "Battle royale". A lot of the sorting though is done by bots, which is why you see "film" in (1939 Film) capitalized, although I'd say that's entirely unnecessary but it doesn't really affect anything either way. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your help. That's the kind of helpful information that ought to be readily available on this template's documentation page. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 07:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been wondering the same, so thanks for asking! V2Blast (talk) 06:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Things must have changed since 2011, because that is not how it works now. In terms of alpha-sorting, Wikipedia does not recognize capital letters before lower-case ones. Per WP:SORTKEY  Also I've never seen a bot add a sortkey. --DB1729talk 15:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization in the sort key 

message: Is it possible to detect all the articles about people that don't contain DEFAULTSORT ? I know many articles don't need the DEFAULTSORT key, but I want to know if it's possible to do that. —  Ark25  (talk) 13:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detecting articles about people which are misssing the DEFAULTSORT key 

message: Please see this discussion about the Lifetime template. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 15:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related template deletion discussion 

message: I think it would be a good idea to create a clone of this template but with a different name, for example PDEFAULTSORT (P stands for Person) and to use it only in articles about people. Then it would be very easy to count the number of articles about people. —  Ark25  (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A DEFAULTSORT template just for people 

message: How to apply the template for people who don't have a Western "First name + Family name"? I encounter this problem in relation with Ethiopian, Sudanese and South Indian names. Any takers? --Soman (talk) 07:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: With South Indian names, especially those that follow  we use the given name for Defaultsort, or at least that's how I've seen it done. —SpacemanSpiff 05:45, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other naming practices? 

message: My specific concern is about the article Bayram al-Tunisi which is its new name. It was moved from "Mahmud Bayram el-Tunsi". Everything updated except the DEFAULTSORT which still reflects the old name (). I'm pretty sure I should change this, but I'm unsure about the proper formatting of the name. The simple formula "surname, forename" seems to be open to interpretation with Arabic names which include the definite article "al-".  For example, here are several variations:
DEFAULTSORT                     	Page Title
DEFAULTSORT:Atrash, Farid al    	Farid al-Atrash
DEFAULTSORT:Attas, Syed Farid   	Syed Farid al-Attas
DEFAULTSORT:Sahlawi, Mohammad   	Mohammad Al-Sahlawi
DEFAULTSORT:Asiri, Khalid (!!)  	Ibrahim al-Asiri
DEFAULTSORT:Jaafari, Ibrahim    	Ibrahim al-Jaafari
DEFAULTSORT:Kashgari, Mahmud Al-	Mahmud al-Kashgari
Are there any opinions about the "correct" way this should be done? Thanks for your attention. Akhooha (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is 5 years late, but it looks like the consensus at Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Other exceptions is to remove the al from the first bit entirely, as for the Ibrahim al-Jaafari example above. Newystats (talk) 00:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper format for Arabic names which include the definite article "al-" 

message: Please remove extra leading and trailing rows in display. --5.43.78.148 (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra rows 

message: I have been using the DEFAULTSORT tag to fix some errors in stub categories for American politicians; either fixing incorrect ones or in some cases adding the tag to articles that don't have it. However, instead of putting them in alphabetical sequence, this is what is happening: ex. is for Category:Tennessee politician stubs
*Granville Hinton
*John Holsclaw Jr.
*Williamson Hartley Horn
*Dan Howell (politician)
*Morton B. Howell
*Hilary Ewing Howse
*Renee Hoyos
*Bruce Hurley
*Chris Hurt
*Leonidas "Leon" Howard
where I would expect Howard to be between Horn and Dan Howell; it instead puts it at the end of the H listing. I double checked to make sure I hadn't misspelled the tag, and it looks right. Is there a coding problem I'm missing (I wouldn't necessarily be able to fix it)... also this seems to have started recently.  Any help appreciated. --FeanorStar7 (talk) 04:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Is the tag working correctly?

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Template:SORTIERUNG:Lasorling. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 11#Template:SORTIERUNG:Lasorling until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Template:SORTIERUNG:Lasorling" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: DEFAULTSORT:Chemet, Renée contains alphabet. should alphabets be in plain or can be accented like "é"? — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 07:22, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: More than a year late, but yes its allowed-- however "é" will be ignored in the sort order. (So it would read that sort key as "Chemet, Rene") :3 F4U (they/it) 13:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I haven't noticed the behavior you describe. WP:SORTCAT states:  Unless I'm misunderstanding something, this means "é" will be interpreted as the equivalent to "e". (So it would read that sort key as "Chemet, Renee") --DB1729talk 13:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ohhh that makes sense. I'm sorry—I misunderstood what WP:SORTKEY states.  I read 'ignores' and thought it meant ignores the entire letter. 🤦 That's my bad. :3 F4U (they/it) 13:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad I could help. I think years ago I saw a page that had listed all the diacritics and alternate letters recognized by WP, but I can't find it now and was probably in a different context than sorting anyway. Also should probably ping User:Ashtamatrikas although it looks like they haven't edited much since the above post. Cheers:) --DB1729talk 14:19, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  alphabets similar to "é" are allowed?