Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 4

message: ====Calculations====
For the area, population density and elevation fields, values can be converted and even placed in an order.  For example many pages only have the metric values entered, automatic conversion will calculate the corresponding imperial values and display them in the infobox.  The reverse is also true.  Many U.S. pages only have the imperial values entered, automatic conversion will calculate the corresponding metric values and display them too.  The calculations will work as long as the values are raw numbers only; no commas or spaces or reference tags.  Editor notes () are ok.  The template will format the numbers displayed in the infobox.  There are reference fields (area_footnotes & population_footnotes) if a reference is available; use the Your reference here  tags.  If both metric and imperial fields such as area_total =259  and TotalArea_sq_mi = 100 are filled in then both values will be displayed regardless if they are correct or not.  This overrides the automatic conversion and can be helpful if the value is a range (see next section).
====Elevation ranges====
If one value in one of the elevation fields is entered correctly then automatic conversion will convert it and display it. However, if a range is entered such as elevation_ft= 33–330 or elevation_ft= 33-330 then automatic conversion will try to convert it but will either generate an Expression Error or will convert it incorrectly base on the - (minus sign).  So in this example above:
::::elevation_ft= 33–330 will generate this error when trying to convert to meters:
:::::(Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "&" m)
::::However: elevation_ft= 33-330 will generate a negative conversion:
::::: 33-330 ft (-67.6 m)
When an editor wants to display an elevation range for a city then they must enter the ranges in both the fields like this elevation =10–100 elevation_ft=33–330 .  This will over-ride the automatic conversion and display the fields correctly in the infobox.
====Unit order====
Cities in the United States that have the United States (or some variation of the name) in the field subdivision_name=, will automatically have the unit order switched to imperial first then metric in parenthesis as suggested by 52 Pickup below . However, not all pages have the country name in the subdivision_name field (sometimes it was state name or county).  Therefore, if a page is metric first and an editor would like imperial first then metric, they can add unit_pref=Imperial (or English, etc) and the units will flip-flop.  Leaving unit_pref blank or entering Metric (or SI) will display the metric units first if the subdivision name is not United States.
I hope that was clear, but any question or errors happen this is the place to post 'em.  —MJCdetroit 03:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How it works

message: Cities in the United States that have the United States (or some variation of the name) in the field subdivision_name=, will automatically have the unit order switched to imperial first then metric in parenthesis as suggested by 52 Pickup below . However, not all pages have the country name in the subdivision_name field (sometimes it was state name or county).  Therefore, if a page is metric first and an editor would like imperial first then metric, they can add unit_pref=Imperial (or English, etc) and the units will flip-flop.  Leaving unit_pref blank or entering Metric (or SI) will display the metric units first if the subdivision name is not United States.
I hope that was clear, but any question or errors happen this is the place to post 'em.  —MJCdetroit 03:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unit order

message: I have tried to use  in this template but have not been able to. Could someone correct this? --Eleassar my talk 16:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Location map

message: Hi! We're discussing the best way we can add the Current City Time CCT to articles. One of our suggestions is to have a main site where the time would be purged and updated. I had a suggestions where it places a link to the category:UTC-1 or whatever the UTC is and then we could link those categories to the articles UTC-1, UTC+0, etc... Any other sugestions. --CyclePat 20:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:CCT]] Project 

message: This template creates a white space in first line of articles, see Ahvaz for example. Anyone know how to fix this? Khoikhoi 06:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not seeing any difference in the position of the first line of text between articles that use this template and those that don't (at least not with monobook or classic skins using Safari).  What skin/browser/OS are you using?  -- Rick Block (talk) 22:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Firefox in OS X. I noticed the whitespace again, but when I reverted CyclePat, it disappeared. To Pat: can you please make edits in a sandbox for now? Once they work, feel free to implement them. Thanks, Khoikhoi 08:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whitespace 

message: I don't know if this is even possible or not, not knowing the internals of this thing, but I have a request: would it be possible to change the template so that either metric or non-metric units would appear first (say, total area), depending on which one was specified first? As it stands now, the default is to display metric units first. This is inappropriate for US cities, where US readers would normally expect to see areas displayed in square miles, not square kilometers.
Any chance of this happening? I understand it may not be technically possible, but it would be a nice amenity, as well as a recognition that the whole world doesn't measure in metric units. +ILike2BeAnonymous 05:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think some users are working on automatic unit conversion (discussed above), and if this is the case then I think it would be easy (and desired) to put the unit which is supplied first, and the auto conversion value second. --MattWright (talk) 05:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've created a set of templates that are used within :Category:Geobox templates, the existing conversion templates are to be found at :Category:Unit display. They automatically convert the figure into its metric/imperial counterpart and print all necessary links. The value from which the other one is calculated gets printed first. The only drawback is the input must be unformatted (i.e. without commas). Check it e.g. on the Vltava (metric values provided) and the Salem River (imperial values provided). – Caroig 09:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To answer ILike2BeAnonymous' question: yes it is possible to swap the unit order.  I provided an option for this at  by entering |metric first= yes.  But first we'll take care of the conversion thing, then the order option. —MJCdetroit 16:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Glad to see the consensus seems to be that providing this flexibility in the template is a Good Thing. +ILike2BeAnonymous 21:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for change in behavior of displayed units 

message: When you try to put a reference within the infobox, it doesn't work. Although it shows up in the references section, there is a mess of code in the infobox where the ref should be. For example, Federal Way, Washington. Any way to solve this problem? --Schzmo 00:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it. Here's the real short version:  One problem that I seen was too many "pipes".  You only need them at the begining (preferred) or the end; not both.  Also there is a special field for references.  Compare the versions to see what I did. Thanks for letting us know.—MJCdetroit 01:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with references 

message: Why does this template put emphasis for area on the metric system? It looks odd to see the area listed as kilometers, while miles is stuck in parentheses. Shouldn't there be an option to have it the other way around? TJ Spyke 09:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There will be an option coming soon to change the order if desired.  However, I think that I will leave metric as the default and yes I do know that there are more U.S. cities that use this template.  —MJCdetroit 13:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you set the template to first check what country the city is in, and then swap the values around if that country uses imperial units (US,UK)? This way, there is no option, giving all entries a uniform and logical appearance. - 52 Pickup 13:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea. TJ Spyke 06:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Land area 

message: When there is no population as of parameter, footnotes are not shown.  Rich Farmbrough, 10:35 14  February 2007 (GMT).
:Can you provide a specific example?  And are you talking about the population footnotes or the regular footnotes? —MJCdetroit 13:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bug - population

message: I have a problem with the image description of the seal of Athens since the template automatically uses input from the first parameter as part of the file name. Would it be possible to include a line to allow a manual input of the article name? One of the other infoboxes has this feature, but I can't remembed which one. If this is done, this possibility should exist for article names for both seals, flags and coats of arms. Valentinian T / C 00:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Option for manually corrected article links? 

message: Many European countries specify location in car number plates (See European vehicle registration plates). For example, German number plates starting with "M" come from Munich, while Spanish ones starting with "M" are from Madrid. 
Would it be possible to introduce such a field to this template?  At the moment, Athens, which uses this template, has the licence plate code in the footnotes field. If this feature were to be added, more European locations could be better served with this template, making it more reasonable to use this template instead of creating more country-specific ones. - 52 Pickup 15:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fair to me. Besides it would be optional anyway.  We should probably think about adding some optional "blank" fields into the template.  —MJCdetroit 16:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The addition of some "blank" fields is a good idea - it gives the template greater flexibility. After the request for a new Polish location infobox in WP Infoboxes, it seems that replacing that template with this one is the way to go (discussion here). - 52 Pickup 10:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The suggested Template: Geobox Town (99% compatible with this template) already has such fields, either in the section with postal_code and area_code, or in a dedicated free field section. – Caroig 10:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Geobox series of templates are brilliant, but we should work on combining them to have a single template. There are many nice features in the Geobox templates that should be imported here. - 52 Pickup 07:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I wrote earlier, I've put a lot of effort into making the Geobox Town template (aliased as Geobox City) accept the field names from Infobox City. So in most cases if you just switch the name of the template, Geobox Town will work perfectly, however the new field names are preferred. One of the aims of the project is to have consistently named fields across the series as well as consistent formatting of the ouput (done via many subtemplates) which may differ form the output of the Infobox City. (E.g. the first figure for area/population gets displayed on the same line as the label which produces just one line of data for settlements with just one figure for are/population). – Caroig 08:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with 52 Pickup that we should try and implement what is good about the geobox template into this template and keep it at only one standard template.  I think the field names should be changed a bit, but not in the exact same way as the geobox.—MJCdetroit 17:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licence plate code 

message: There are over 3000 pages using this template.  Is it time for full protection? -- Rick Block (talk) 04:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the only reason. No. But if this pertains to my request because of alleged vandalism, then yes, of course with the prefered version supporting the new categories until the issue is resolved. I have attempted to add new auto-generated categories. Unfortunelly one of them, :category:Cities in the UTC-5 timezone, is nominated for deletion. As you probably know, the recent changes to this templates undermine wikipedia's deletion process for categories, which is why I requested this page be reverted and protected. The manner at which you bring it up here doesn't quite please me because it appears to lack many of the afformentioned details. --CyclePat 04:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's related to the number of recent changes, yes.  We generally don't protect to a "preferred version" (except in cases of obvious vandalism, which IMO this is not).  Edit warring is very bad.  Edit warring on a template used by 3000 articles cannot be tolerated. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After manually checking and editing all 3,000 or so pages with the help of WP:AWB, I would be in favor of the protection.  —MJCdetroit 15:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Post Scriptum: Of course in the interest of development, we would have to have some type of a "test sandbox" for editors without access to play with.  MJCdetroit 15:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time to fully protect this template? 

message: This edit adds parameters for flag_link, seal_link, shield_link, and logo_link (presumably to avoid red links where these articles don't exist).  Requiring an explicit link parameter for these articles makes it completely unambiguous whether there's a link or not, and removes any forced association between the name of the city article and the name of the article about the flag (or seal or ...).   Unfortunately, it also breaks every link that did exist (like some of the "Flag of" articles here).   Another way to do this would be to make these links conditional on the existence of the article (the way the "leader" links are handled, above).  Unlike in the leader case, I think it's actually appropriate to automatically link these (if the article exists).  These are articles with names like Flag of Denver, Colorado, which are extremely unlikely to need disambiguation.  I really think it would be a good idea for folks to start discussing changes to this template before making them.  -- Rick Block (talk) 05:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, my fault :(...  The matter has been brought up here a couple different times recently.  I do think making the links conditional on their existence would be better so I've reverted my edit.  I think changing the way those links are displayed (or not displayed) will improve the template.  —MJCdetroit 02:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem is getting people to comment might be worse than pulling teeth.  I'd be happy to add ifexist checks for these.  Unless anyone has some objection, I'll do this on Friday.  -- Rick Block (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sometimes, you have to just edit and wait for a reaction...—MJCdetroit 14:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the additional fields can be used with the following if-format: . This way some control can still be present in linking to the right page, red links are eliminated, and the previously-existing links will still work. - 52 Pickup 15:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe, but if not, I only added the new links to two pages before I reverted.  —MJCdetroit 15:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a good idea to have these extra link fields. I can't remember where, but I've seen pages which contain such flag/seal information that the template would not have been able detect otherwise. - 52 Pickup 15:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Changed the template to reflect 52pickup's idea.  It seems to have worked; see Lethbridge.  —MJCdetroit 05:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link fixes 

message: Why is the nickname just floating between the location map and the flag and seal images now? That seems to be an odd place for it. Kaldari 19:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname 

message: I've been thinking in merging  and Establishment date categories into this template, please tell me what do you think. Thanks. --–  Emperor Walter Humala  · ( shout! · sign? ) 21:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging template

message: Does anyone have, know someone who has, or can tell me where I can find databases with all information needed to create infoboxes for every single city and town in the United States?  I'm looking to do this in the next few months, but can't find a single source with all the needed data.  Right now I'm considering writing a bot to read through every US town/city article and extract the data, but it would much better if I could just find a set master tables (ideally from government databases sitting out there somewhere).  I'll also take any information available on counties, census designated places, and any other geographic division that might require infoboxing.
The information I would need is: Town/City name, County, State, population total, population density (per sq mi and per sq km), population date, area total (sq mi and sq km), area water (sq mi and sq km), area land (sq mi and sq km), elevation (ft and m), coordinates, time zone, summer time zone, zip code(s), and area code(s).  Optional data would include nickname, motto, type of government, leader type, leader name, website, and any other important notes.
Please let me know if you have anything, and I'll be happy to start compiling it all into a giant Excel spreadsheet for future processing into infoboxes.
Note that this will only be done for cities and towns that currently lack infoboxes (though I could theoretically use it to fill in missing information in cities/towns already having infoboxes).
Thanks, --CapitalR 14:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we can coordinate something with the UTC time project I tried to do which placed all the cities by time.  Or :Category:Geography by time. Unfortunatelly not everyone is as enthusiastic about that category but if we ended up making a program that could read through all the information that is on the pages to make a couple SQL like statement searchs into the wiki database on the information provide in the template:infobox city.  This could be a another way around my pesky problem of anoying left winged conservatives that don't want to utilise categories. (A database!) Let's talk by email. --CyclePat 22:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Master Databases with all City/Town Data for the United States

message: In Havířov article it shows up "Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character" sentence in area parameter. - Darwinek 22:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is actually not a bug.  It happens because the numbers are not entered in a raw format; 24000 and NOT 24,000 or 24 000.  The numbers will be converted and formated automatically by the template.  I fixed them.  See How it works Above for a better explaination. —MJCdetroit 01:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A bit more on this - including punctuation causes the parser functions used to do the automatic unit conversions to fail.  The template can neither detect nor automatically correct for this (given that m:StringFunctions are not installed here).  -- Rick Block (talk) 01:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bug Expression error

message: I don't really like the "colored" infobox header version. A graphic designer would be horrified. Please someone revert!.--((F3rn4nd0 ))(BLA BLA BLA) 07:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone else feel the same way? I placed a new version in the test template here.  Take a look and talk about it. —MJCdetroit 01:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it. Many infoboxes have coloured headers, so this doesn't look at all out of place. - 52 Pickup 08:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: There wasn't a color before. 52pickup's comments above were/are the exact reason I colored the background for the header.  As for making it optional, I would be against that.  It should be all colored or all not colored.  This infobox is very flexible as it is with only one required parameter.  It should have a consistent look throughout; whether that be all with a colored header (like many other infoboxes) or all without a colored header (as before). —MJCdetroit 14:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the comment of User:F3rn4nd0 above, I'd also like to see the changes reverted. For an encyclopedia, I prefer a neutral outlook of the infobox itself over a colored one. After all, if you want more color, a photograph in the infobox can provide this. It shouldn't be too hard to find a colored photo for any city. – Ilse@ 17:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Let's see what other editors have to say first.  If it also makes others puke then of course we'll get rid of it. Regards, MJCdetroit 18:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I strongly oppose the color change. The appearance of this infobox is meant to be consistent with Template:Infobox Country and other geography infoboxes. What purpose does the color serve? How does the color blue relate to the subject of cities? I think there should have been a consensus before the change was made. — Kelw (talk) 18:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer gray or no color as well. Seems to be more in line with the state and country infoboxes too. --MattWright (talk) 18:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Background color for name fields

message: Actually, there isn't really a "section". It is just kind of there with the subdivision and the established dates.  Therefore, I am going to separate it with a line and give it a section heading like Area and Population have.  I think it will make the template look better, but if it makes you puke (like the name color) then feel free to revert it. Also, how about some blank fields for each section and the template?  —MJCdetroit 02:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's an example of where blank fields would be handy Template:Infobox London/Test.  If noone objects, I'll insert them soon. —MJCdetroit 01:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I'm in favor of a blank field in each section, as I have some uses for such fields in certain articles.  Also, could someone look at Durham, Connecticut.  Note that the "Government Type" field has a problem; the word "Type" in "Government Type" wraps to the second line, which is okay, but on the right hand side, the value "Selectmen-town meeting" starts on the same line with "Type" instead of the top line with "Government" (at least on my IE7).  This should be examined and fixed.  Thanks, --CapitalR 10:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I added two additional blank fields.  The fields are named blank_name paired with blank_info and blank1_name paired with blank1_info.  This can be useful for cities in Europe that have license plates issued for that city.  Example: Warsaw.  —MJCdetroit 03:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Government section and blank fields 

message: Hello, for those interested, a short update on the recent development of this template: 
* several issues concerning display of some fields (especially the maps) in IE7 have been solved
* a set of fields dedicated to municipal parts has been introduced, there can be a pretty long list which upon the load of the page is "folded", see e.g. here: Pilsen
* some fields can make use of the title HTML attribute (they're named field_label), i.e. a text displayed on hover (see Plasy and stop your mouse over Little District. This might introduced to all field labels.
* the coordinates-related fields are more flexible now, they can be filled in in the classic format (deg, min, sec) or using the decimal format, with negative values for the Western and Southern hemisphere (the locator dot system works well with both systems too of course)
* a secondary field for another map (without the locator dot system, just a plain picture) used e.g. here: West Chester, Pennsylvania - that Geobox makes use of a calibrated Pennsylvania State map so the locator dot is placed based on the coordinates
* Geobox Town can be used together with Geobox Region when a region has the same name as the town/city and thus there's no need for a special page for that administrative unit (which would usuallly contain not much more than some statistical data anyway). Rather extensive use of the Geobox Region can be seen here: Pilsen Region, a combination of Geobox Town and Geobox Region e.g. here: Radnice. – Caroig 20:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geobox Town/City, Chapter Two 

message: I've spent a while compiling a giant database of information on US census division statistics, and I'm nearly ready to request permission to use a bot to add this template to all 41,903 articles that I have information on.  However, a serious discussion will need to take place first to determine if this is the correct template to use, and what kind of modifications need to be made to it before its usage jumps from 4100 to 45000 articles.  Thus, I will start that discussion here, so please add your comments.  I haven't applied for a bot account yet, and will only do so when/if a consensus is reached here that adding this template to the articles is the right thing to do.
My database, which I compiled from many government databases, contains the following information.  These are nearly all articles added by User:Ram-Man and User:rambot, but there are about 5000 that are missing (and which I will add in the style of the rambot).  The percentage refers to the number of records, out of 41,903, that I have that information on:
* Name and type (city/town/township/CDP/borough/charter township/balance/etc.) (100%)
* State and all counties that the location is in, along with all corresponding FIPs codes (99.91%)
* Place ID, from national geography database  (97.80%)
* Population year, total, density (100%)
* Area total, water, land, in both km and mi squared (100%)
* Latitude and Longitude (99.91%)
* Elevation (97.79%)
* Time zone, UTC offset, Daylight Savings use, DST offset (100%)
* Area codes (69.00%, mostly missing from CDPs and townships)
* ZIP codes (62.20%, mostly missing from CDPs and townships)
* I also plan on generating and uploading new, standard, and prettier maps for all 41,903 locations (based on a combination of St. Paul, MN, Concord, NH, and Miami, FL map designs).
Information I can't find in public databases (if you know where to find an item, let me know):
* City/town website listings
* Area code and ZIP code geographic boundary files
* List of mayors or other leaders of all cites in the US
* List of dates settled/incorporated for all locations in the US
Note that I will not overwrite information in articles that already have an infobox, but I will add missing information (though I will record all information already in infoboxes, so I can later examine if it is accurate, and replace it later on if it is not accurate).  Also, I do not plan on using the bot to edit the largest 200 cities or so, and these articles will be edited by hand to add the information.  
The new maps will only be used on articles that contain no map, or contain one of the simple red-dot maps.  Articles with more sophisticated maps will not have their maps modified.  However, the maps for all locations will be uploaded, even if it is not used in the infobox, so someone can manually add the new map to an article later on if they choose.
Certain states, such as Massachusetts and New Hampshire already have most of their cities/towns/etc using this template; this project would just be a continuation of this process to extend the templates to all cities/towns in every state.
I have a few requests/suggestions for changes to be made to the template before this huge-scale use:
# See Durham, Connecticut.  Note that the "Government Type" field has a problem; the word "Type" in "Government Type" wraps to the second line, which is ok, but on the right hand side, the value "Selectmen-town meeting" starts on the same line with "Type" instead of the top line with "Government" (at least on my IE7).  This should be examined and fixed.
# The five strangely named parameters for area, "TotalArea_sq_mi", "LandArea_sq_mi", "WaterArea_sq_mi", "MetroArea_sq_mi", and "UrbanArea_sq_mi" should be named with more standard names.  It would be good if someone could make both the old names and five new names usable, until I can convert all instances of the old names to the new standard names with a bot.  At that point these old names could be completely removed.
# It would be useful to have a way to include FIPS codes and a FeatureID (see the File Format section in ) in this template to help people keep track of the exact record of the city in census and geographical databases.  Many places have the same name within states (for example, there are four Exeters in Pennsylvania), and it is difficult to tell them apart without such a number.  Perhaps we could add a few official fields at the end (something like id_type1, id_number1, id_type2, id_number2, etc) that don't actually display anything, but just exist for classification purposes only.  Or perhaps they could display the ID numbers at the bottom in very small print.
So, please add any questions and comments about this proposed use of the template below.  --CapitalR 10:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Overview

message: The parameter names have been (or will be) changed so that they are a little more consistent with each other.  Infobox City/Test has already been changed.  It has side by side infobox comparisons —which look the exact same. It also has a table showing the new field names and the deprecated (old) names.  After the new names are implemented in the template, the old names will still work and we can get a bot to switch all the pages using this template to use the new names. Please see Infobox City/Test. —MJCdetroit 01:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice job getting those new names in there.  --CapitalR 16:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New more consistent parameter names and an explaination table