Template talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 4

message: I noticed this on Albert Einstein's talk page that this banner doesn't play nice when the next banner if there is an extra space in front of the second banner. The temporary solution was to remove the space, however, this should be addressed by this template. --Farix (Talk) 02:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll also point out that the template also add extra space at the end when nested and followed by a few other banners, such as Template:WikiProject Radio. --Farix (Talk) 21:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor bug 

message: From my talk page; presented here as it would need the template changing. As per my pasted reply, I don't think we need List-class but am happy to implement it if we do. --kingboyk 20:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is something of a "frequently asked question" :) In my opinion, lists should be assessed using article classifications. Lists can get featured after all. If that's not what folks want we'll have to get a list-class param added to the template. --kingboyk 13:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, that's what we decided. Here I think... --Psychless 00:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

text: So, something like a list=yes parameter? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 17:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, if it's really needed it should be class=List. Some other projects already have it; we never thought it worth adding I guess... --kingboyk 16:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We used to have a List=yes at  but it became very tricky for use so I reverted to class=list, what it then shouldbe noticed is that Non-article class params shouldn't be given ANY importance value, if so, all project stats gets broken user:andersmusician --190.42.191.129 06:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Class=List is a very bad idea- what do you do if it's a featured list? Lists can have ratings, too, you know. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 15:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IVE GOT AN IDEA: what about making a special box to be shown if class=list, to specify specific list values user:andersmusician --201.230.122.42 19:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List-class 

message: On Talk:Mance Lipscomb, they don't cover the whole width of the BannerShell template area, which looks pretty ugly in my view. BNutzer 23:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this has been discussed, and when WP:Bio implemented the nesting function they decided not to hide or reformat the boxes (same with the auto=yes function). I think the idea was that they would stand out more this way, and it was encouragement to editors to add photos, etc and thus get rid of these alerts, which are meant to be temporary. TAnthony 15:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They do indeed stand out ;) Thanks for the clarification. BNutzer 15:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Width and padding issues with needs-photo and needs-infobox flags

message: There seems to be a line space underneath the template, which should be avoided. See Talk:Bruno Cullen as an example. SpecialWindler  talk 10:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For some unknown reason, that happens when WPBiography and certain templates are added to the same talk page. I don't know why it happens, but it can't be the reason you gave, since it doesn't happen all the time. Regards, Psychless 22:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

text: WPBiography is one of the most complicated templates. Finding a small error like this is very hard. So, if you can find the exact changes needed to remove that space please tell and it will be fixed. — Shinhan < talk > 05:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Space

message: It'd be nice if someone got rid of the ridiculous capital P in the word Project in this template.  That's a pretty high profile error for something that's locked from editing. DreamGuy 06:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think perhaps that this is referring to 'the Project' as a shortened form of the proper noun WikiProject, as opposed to 'a project', and that the capitalisation is therefore correct. Maybe I'm wrong - some consensus is needed before I change it though. ck lostsword•T•C 15:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not by Wikipedia standards it isn't correct. DreamGuy 22:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Although, just as a comment, the bio WP is referred to in the lower case in the rest of the documentation. I'll change in an hour if there are no objections. ck lostsword•T•C 15:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "a project" vs "the Project" surely? Anyway, looks like it's been changed, I'll remove the 
 template now. --kingboyk 22:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done ck lostsword•T•C 22:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo 

message: I've not been keeping a close eye on the template lately, so if I've missed any changes which may affect my plugin please let me know (new redirects, new or deprecated parameters, new logic, etc). I'm working on AWB at the moment and will hopefully be doing a tagging run shortly to test some new features. --kingboyk 22:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any changes I missed? 

message: Why does this template have an "infobox needed" switch that, when triggered, generates a message claiming falsely that the article "needs" an infobox.  No article needs an infobox.  That's lunacy. --Tony Sidaway 22:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the English Wikipedia loves templates for some reason. Garion96 (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It should be "requested". Changing the name of the parameter would involve too much work because of many existing instances, but the wording of the banner that pops up can easily changed (I'm surprised it hasn't been already, as this isn't the first comment on the matter). As for "why", it's "just because"... I think the wording came from an older template. --kingboyk 20:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that "infobox requested" sounds better.  But why is that part of this template? I'm very worried that this kind of behavior might actually result in people placing infoboxes on articles. --Tony Sidaway 23:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Infobox needed"

message: This template contains an extraneous linebreak between lines 512 and 513. It normally does not cause any problems, but will display when this template is immediately followed by a template that similarly contains an extraneous linebreak at the beginning. Please make the following addition to hide this linebreak, as has been done with the other linebreaks in this template:
 
  |=Category:Unassessed  articles
  |#default=Category:Unassessed  articles}}}}{{#switch:|Stub|stub={{#ifeq:|yes|{{Stubclass
 |assessment=Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment
 
Thanks. Anomie 00:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tra (Talk) 00:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraneous linebreak when followed by certain other templates 

message: In case anyone is interested, a manually generated list of the 212 categories (as of the time of writing) populated by this template is at Template:WPBiography/Categories. I am also adding this link to the template documentation. Carcharoth 01:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category list 

message: FYI, some comments on the granularity of name & address metadata: Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Granularity. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 12:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Granularity 

message: This is not a major issue, but on the next update, the fair use information needs to be updated; the term "fair use" is generally being changed to "non-free."
*Wikipedia:Fair use criteria now redirects to Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria
*Fair use, used in two places, should be changed to non-free
--Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use 

message: Please see here for the latest changes made in the sandbox. This adds the "fair use" to "non free" changes suggested above, the five categories suggested earlier, in addition to the removal of . Once implemented,  needs to be added to the documentation subpage. Carcharoth 15:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 15:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Carcharoth 00:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest three changes ready in sandbox 

message: Please see User talk:CBDunkerson#WPBiography template stuff again for more discussion of listas and DEFAULTSORT coding in the template. I'm now going to tentatively propose a change that should address most issues that are being discussed. Carcharoth 11:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More listas and DEFAULTSORT discussion 

message: What you need in the first place is a whole lot better instruction to editors on how to use these sort keys.  We have a lot of not very bright editors on Wikipedia, who need explicit instructions on how to do it. It seems that most of those involved in this discussion would fall into that category, since this hasn't even been mentioned as far as I can see.
The problem is that we have a very rudimentary, simplistic sort mechanism.  Everything in the sort key is sorted.  That includes spaces, punctuation marks, whatever.  But it isn't sorted in accordance with anybody's sorting rules.  It is simply sorted in accordance with Unicode numbers.  
The essential factors that need to be noted, and that need to be included in the instructions to people who will be using "listas" or "DEFAULT" sort include these points:
#Start the sort key with an uppercase letter to insure case-insensitivity at that level.  Ideally, we should probably have totally case-insensitive sorting, but to change that just using sort keys rather than through some software change would be problematic.  
#Do not include ANY alphabetic characters other than the 26 letters of the English alphabet.   No diacritics whatsoever.
#Strip most punctuation from the sort key, especially if it is the first character in an article's name.  The comma followed by a space is the conventional separator between surname and given name in people articles; it should be there, even if the name order is the same as in the article name, as in "Chan, Wai Ho" as the sort key for Chan Wai Ho.
See Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Ordering names in a category for more essential pointers.
Gene Nygaard 12:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A postscript: One advantage linkas has over DEFAULTSORT is :Category:Biography articles with listas parameter.  It would be nice if somebody would help out and use that to start cleaning up the problems I mentioned.  You could start by fixing everything that comes after Z.  Gene Nygaard 13:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biggest problem with listas, and to a lesser exent DEFAULTSORT, hasn't even been mentioned

message: This template includes:

This rule is missing a clause for "sports-work-group."  The effect is that a page with "sports-work-group = yes" in its WPBiography template appears in both :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people and :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of sportspeople.
I am not well versed in template conditional logic.  I believe this rule should read:

Thanks -- Tim Pierce 02:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing clause in catchall photo categorization rule 

message: Now that I have read some of the source code for this template, I see a "military-task-force" parameter that does not appear in the template documentation.  I don't think I understand the difference between "military-task-force" and "military-work-group".  They appear to be treated differently only in that articles tagged with "military-work-group" are also placed in appropriate categories for their class, importance and priority, and in "military-task-force" articles, these parameters are ignored.  That doesn't make any sense, so I think I must have it wrong.  Can anyone shed any light on this and possibly update the documentation? Tim Pierce 03:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation for military-task-force? 

message: HI All, I would like to use this template on my personal genealogy wiki. I tried copying the page but things don't seem to work. Is there a way I can use it on non-wikipedia, wikimedia websites? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.180.130.31 (talk • contribs) 
:This template transcludes, many, many, other templates. If you wanted this on your site you would also have to copy all the transcluded templates as well. You would also need to upload all the images used in it. My advice is to create your own template. Psychless 18:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This Template for Personal Websites

message: I'm interested in adding a religion-work-group or a saints-work-group to the WPBiography template.  Here's why:
I have been working on categorizing the pages in :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people by tagging each  template with the appropriate working group.  The category is filled with requests for images of saints and other religious figures, however, and there is no appropriate working group.  There is a Saints WikiProject, however.
I do not personally have an interest in maintaining or working on this work group -- I just want to streamline the job of categorizing requested photographs and images.  What process would I follow to start one or to find someone willing to take it on? Tim Pierce 06:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  adding a religion-work-group? 

message: I think the text "This article was the Biography WikiProject Collaboration of the Fortnight (dates). For details on the improvements made to the article, see the history of past collaborations." should be changed to the simpler "This article was the Biography WikiProject Collaboration (dates)." Then, a collaboration can be selected for any length of time (week/fortnight/month/whatever) without the need to make sure all the time periods on the templates match with one another. DrKiernan 08:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration 

message: The template says that an article is "within the scope" of the biography wikiproject, but articles are "supported by" the various workgroups.  I think it might be better to use "within the scope" throughout, to avoid giving people the wrong idea.  Xtifr tälk 14:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  workgroups: support or scope? 

message: I've made some minor visual changes at the sandbox. If the job queue is ever just too low an administrator could make the change :). Otherwise just include it in the next update. Thanks, Psychless 04:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor changes 

message: I like :Image:P_vip.png, which features prominently on the Portal page. I personnaly dislike portal templates without pictures and would like to start a discussion on its inclusion in the template, like 
32x28px	Free softwarePortal
 for WP:WPFS. -- Kl4m Talk Contrib 03:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I am bothered that there may be an issue of overcategorization within the listas categories.
When an article has a listas parameter, the article gets tagged with the unnecessary Category:Biography articles with listas parameter category.
To me, what I see is:
* Category:Biography articles without listas parameter - "Great! I can fix that by adding listas parameter!"
* Category:Biography articles with listas parameter - Why is this here? This is overcategorization!
It appears that some coding causes both of these categories to be created. If it sees "listas=yes", why does it need to create a category?
My main point is: How do we code the WPBIO box to not create both categories, but only post a notification to support "Biography articles without listas parameter" ? Any info or insight?  Guroadrunner 11:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason I created and implemented both was to enable the category with the listas parameter to be used to demonstrate the utility of such a parameter. ie. browse that category to see articles in alphabetical order. In the other category, the one needing clean-up, they are not in the right order. Carcharoth 23:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I still don't see the utility of this listas parameter at all in the face of DEFAULTSORT.  I know that someone here does, but the argument has yet to get through to me. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 04:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've explained it before. Listas is a template parameter. DEFAULTSORT is a magic word. There are some things you can do with one that you can't (easily) do with the other. Here is a simple example. Please provide a list of all the pages that use DEFAULTSORT (not easily done). Now provide a list of all the pages that use the listas parameter (the category allows this). I have never been able to find anyone who can overcome this objection. Seriously. If you can find out a way to list uses of DEFAULTSORT, so that people can identify article that don't yet have defaultsort, then I will happily help in getting rid of listas (which in the simplest case can be seen simply as a way of parameterising and categorising the use of defaultsort on talk pages). Carcharoth 10:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the concise explanation.  I have been following the DEFAULTSORT/listas argument for some time but had not seen the difference so clearly expressed.  But it seems to me that the disadvantages of "listas" outweigh this advantage.  Building a bot to track uses of DEFAULTSORT, or lobbying Wikimedia to add this as a feature, both seem like more productive solutions than the "listas" parameter.  My two cents.  Tim Pierce 00:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on listas -- categories 

message: not real important, but next time the template's updated, can it reflect the change frm 'importance' to 'priority' ie display that rating like the other project templates display the 'importance' rating?  ⇒ bsnowball  16:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it IS rather important: now the template uses both "priority" and "importance" in different places without mutual interchangeability and any documentation. (Oh, what I'd give to have the rights to sort out the mess in the code...) --Malyctenar 09:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displaying priority 

message: Please fix the wikilink that currently leads to Slander_and_libel so that it correctly leads to Defamation. Jcc1 04:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially libelous