Template talk:Infobox/doc

This MedLibrary.org supplementary page on Template talk:Infobox/doc is provided directly from the open source Wikipedia as a service to our readers. Please see the note below on authorship of this content, as well as the Wikipedia usage guidelines. To search for other content from our encyclopedia supplement, please use the form below:

Related Sponsors

BM Pharmacy Generic pharmaceuticals at unbeatable prices. Insomnia, men's health, hair health, pain control. bmpharmacy.com

Online Pharmacy Carisoprodol, tadalafil, sildenafil, vardenafil and more... xlpharmacy.com

MedBasket.com Discreet. Inexpensive. Fast shipping. Great selection. What more can we say? medbasket.com

Frugalmed 2000 reasons to shop with us first. frugalmed.com

Ads by Tiva

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template:Infobox page.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming
Archives: 1, 2, 3

KISS

system provides uniformity and makes infobox creation easier, but is it necessary for all infoboxes, and does it make the big picture overly-complex? !! time= 23:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC) }}

Regarding this conversion to use Template:infobox, and the over all purpose of this template, I don't see the point. Doesn't this make it harder to edit the infobox, with out any real benefit? It would be far easier to just use normal wikitable syntax and follow some kind of guideline for helping to standardize the template. And if anyone is wondering, I feel the same way about {{Navbox}}, though I think the argument is stronger for infoboxes. -- Ned Scott 05:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

And while my understanding of CSS is limited, I thought that's what the table class was for, this kind of common formatting. -- Ned Scott 06:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I support {{Infobox}} because for me it usually makes seeing the wood for the trees easier. In other words, to take the previous and current {{Infobox Film}}'s code, the current version is much more user-friendly to me because virtually all the repeating {{!}}s, {{!}}-s, {{#if:}}s, etc are gone. Ditto {{Navbox}} (and variants) with navboxes. So, more a case of {{Infobox}} (and {{Navbox}}es) MakingISS. Sardanaphalus (talk) 07:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll repeat what I said on Template talk:Infobox Film: I still think it makes things needlessly complicated in the big picture. Infobox film doesn't have to be "easy to edit" for every single editor, and it's protected from editing anyways. There's tons of editors who easily understand how to edit the template, if an edit is needed. This used to be one of the very few templates that one could even copy onto another installation of MediaWiki without making any modifications, because it was a well crafted template.

We're supposed to be dealing with parser functions, and we're supposed to be making hand-crafted changes (when necessary). Everything else can be covered in the infobox CSS class.

This does more to limit future options and possible custom considerations, because we wouldn't be able to have any unique code. This is fixing a non-existent problem. I insist on reverting back to the previous code until we can discuss this some more. -- Ned Scott 23:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow... well, let's see what your request for comment brings. I don't think {{Infobox}} is about fixing a non-existent problem, but about making infoboxes easier to create and maintain. I think, for instance, I'm less likely to mislay or miscount "}}"s and "}}}"s, etc. Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

If an infobox needs unique code, then by all means hand-craft an infobox for it. There are still lots of navboxes out there that have hand-crafted code to accomplish things that the {{navbox}} template can't yet handle. However, in most of the cases I've seen, the "unique" code in infoboxes simply serves to steepen the learning curve for any new editor who comes along and doesn't accomplish anything that this template can't accomplish in a more standardized manner. Bryan Derksen (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

It's possible for pure-template markup to be unmaintainable gunk just like with wikitables, admittedly. However, not only does using {{infobox}} consistently help to make infoboxen across the project look and behave similarly, it also leads to cleaner code when done right. It can be seen from the example code that almost all of the trimmed material is syntactical cruft. I'd also point out that similar movements have taken place across the board ({{navbox}}, {{userbox}}, {{ambox}}) and that the trend is clear. As for "future options and possible custom considerations", in my experience it's possible for the generic templates to accomplish (or to be modified to accomplish) basically anything that could reasonably be required from an infobox, and that there's no point in having infinite flexibility just for flexibility's sake. I suppose conversion wholeheartedly. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've come across a number of infoboxes in my travels that have features that can't be easily reproduced with infobox. I've simply left those ones alone. Perhaps in the future {{infobox}} will be expanded to handle more; I added on microformat-handling parameters after the fact, for example. Bryan Derksen (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ned, I've noticed that you've been going around and reverting templates away from using {{infobox}} without any explanation in either talk pages or edit summaries, and for no readily apparent reasons. I count 28 of these on April 19 alone. This strikes me as being just as disruptive as trying to force {{infobox}} on a template that it can't handle in the first place, something I've avoided doing. Could you at least raise specific objections when you do something like that? I see no reason not to simply roll back such unexplained reversions. Bryan Derksen (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I should apologies for that. At first I was only going to go through a few that seemed very obvious (ones that didn't even use any complex coding like parser functions), but got caught up in my own frustration. I'm waiting to get more input from this RfC, and yes, in the future I will try to better explain individual situations. -- Ned Scott 02:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll holding off re-reverting them too, then, at least not without addressing each one in detail to make sure I didn't break anything. I suspect that in a lot of cases where there weren't parser functions used it was because they're tricky for novice templateers to figure out how to use in the first place rather than because they wouldn't be useful. But everyone makes mistakes and I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. Bryan Derksen (talk) 04:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting idea, but of course not one that should be rolled out over all infobox templates. Many infobox templates are quite simple in terms of layout, containing a simple 2-column table and maybe an image (eg. Infobox Film) so I can see no problem there, but for more complicated ones that are under constant development (eg. {{Infobox Settlement}}) I would be against such a change since its content is far more complex than this setup can allow in a manageable way. 52 Pickup (deal) 11:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the very simple ones should be left alone (no parsers, etc), but we should definitely strive for some visual consistency. I guess it does make sense for templates like the Film one to be converted, because they're far from simple, but at the same time they're protected. I guess I can't say I have a strong opinion on those ones like I did before, having thought more about it (being, ones that are complex, but protected). This does seem to be a very nice tool for making and maintaining infoboxes, and there probably won't be much of an issue. -- Ned Scott 06:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Multiple images?

So {{infobox software}} has both the logo and screenshot attributes. Can we get image1/caption1 etc. to accommodate this? Cheers. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but where abouts? What code needs to be added where? Happy‑melon 17:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The current code is:

-->{{#if:{{{image|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" style="text-align:center; {{{imagestyle|}}}"> {{{image}}} {{#if:{{{caption|}}}|<br />
<span style="{{{captionstyle|}}}">{{{caption}}} }}</span></td></tr>}}<!--

Add the following lines directly afterwards to enable a total of three maximum image/caption pairs:

-->{{#if:{{{image1|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" style="text-align:center; {{{imagestyle|}}}"> {{{image1}}} {{#if:{{{caption1|}}}|<br />
<span style="{{{captionstyle|}}}">{{{caption1}}} }}</span></td></tr>}}<!--
-->{{#if:{{{image2|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" style="text-align:center; {{{imagestyle|}}}"> {{{image2}}} {{#if:{{{caption2|}}}|<br />
<span style="{{{captionstyle|}}}">{{{caption2}}} }}</span></td></tr>}}<!--

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

That would produce three image stacked together. Do we actually need multiple images here? You can easily hack image= to include images in the same way. — Edokter • Talk • 19:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather not include hacks in individual instances of the template if it can be fixed cleanly upstream. Using additional parameters appears to be the most logical and intuitive way to do it, and would be the smoothest way to move templates like {{infobox software}} over to using {{infobox}} as far as I can see. Take a look at AbiWord, bash or irssi for the desired effect. Additional captions aren't strictly required here but there's no reason not to offer them just in case. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not really a hack; just use image = [[Image:]] [[Image:]], especially if you don't need the extra captions. That could be done in the templates to be convereted, so I don't really see the need to add extra parameters in this template when it isn't used that often. — Edokter • Talk • 22:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Alternately, you can use data cells without labels to provide pretty much the same thing as the image cell. Just go data1= [[Image:blah.jpg]] Caption text to add another centered image. Bryan Derksen (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Not done for now - please establish a consensus for how best to implement this. Happy‑melon 11:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Image captions

The current infobox template does not pass on image caption to the image tags themselves. Meaning that if you put your mouse over the image of Albert Einstein in his article, instead of display the caption from the TITLE field of the image, it says the filename. More seriously, as a result of this, the ALT tag of the images displayed through this template is blank—both incorrect by web standards as well as rendering the image inaccessible and invisible to those who rely on ALT tags.

I don't know enough about template syntax to dare mess with it myself, but surely there is a way to take the caption parameter and pass it into the bit that creates the framed image, without forcing anyone to change how they use the infoboxes? I think it's something that should definitely be done ASAP. --Fastfission (talk) 00:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no easy way (or one at all) to do this automatically; The given image paramter expects a full image syntax, including the [[ and ]], so there is no way of injecting the caption into this. As a workaround, you can enter the caption in both the image and caption parameter. — Edokter • Talk • 13:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

You could use something like this code snippet:

|image= [[Image:{{{filename}}}|{{{caption}}}]]
|caption= {{{caption}}}

That would break existing templates horribly; image= was designed to enter the entire images syntax. — Edokter • Talk • 18:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

No, that code snippet is for calling the infobox template from the specific infobox being converted to use it. So if you're already using the name "image" for your image filename parameter, your template would consist of:

{{infobox
|title= My Infobox
|image= [[Image:{{{image}}}|{{{caption}}}]]
|caption= {{{caption}}}
|label1= Content 'n' Stuff
|data1={{{contentnstuff}}}
}}

And soforth. It's like object-oriented programming, we're overriding the meaning of the "image" parameter using a wrapper that modifies and passes it along to the parent template. I've done this trick with other infoboxes before and it works just fine. Bryan Derksen (talk) 22:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

There, I just updated {{Infobox Scientist}} to do this - see [1]. If you put your pointer over Albert's picture you get an informative alt text now. Bryan Derksen (talk) 22:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I think there has been some kind of misunderstanding of web standards. That code in Infobox Scientist means that someone with visual impairment using a screen reader hears the same caption twice. I guess there must be a better approach. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

another style parameter for data-only row

Hello, I'm using this template in Japanese Wikipedia, thanks! (though the two templates differ in very detail) When I use data-only row (data cell without label), often feel another style parameter for data-only rows would be great. For exmaple, when you try to apply this template to Template:Probability distribution, you would probably use data-only rows for image cells and have to code like:

|datastyle = text-align:left<!-- for normal data cell -->
|data1 = <div style="text-align:center">...

Such cases occur quite often because data-only rows and normal data cells usually have different "text-align" style. Can we have a special style parameter for data-only row? --125.201.158.128 (talk) 08:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how easy it would be to add such a parameter, offhand, but in this particular case the default already works the way you're requesting. A data cell with a label defaults to left alignment and a data cell with no label defaults to centered alignment. Example:

Label1	Data1 (left aligned)
Data2 (centered)

You could also use headers for special row formatting, assuming you weren't using headers as headers already. Bryan Derksen (talk) 17:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for teaching. I haven't noticed that the default already works well since I manually set datastyle = text-align:left, which overrides the default.

However I still want the new parameter. It will be like:

{{#if:{{{header1|}}}|<tr><th colspan="2" style="text-align:center; {{{headerstyle|}}}">{{{header1|}}}</th></tr>| {{#if:{{{label1|}}}|{{#if:{{{data1|}}}|<tr><th style="{{{labelstyle|}}}">{{{label1|}}}</th><td class="{{{class1|}}}" style="{{{datastyle|}}}">{{{data1|}}}</td></tr>}}| {{#if:{{{data1|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" class="{{{class1|}}}" style="text-align:center; {{{datastyle|}}};{{{specialdatastyle}}}">{{{data1|}}}</td></tr>}} }} }}

specialdatastyle (the name is just an example) is the new parameter. --125.201.3.209 (talk) 17:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Inheriting data from other templates?

So I'm stuck here. The issue is with {{infobox VG character}}, which allows for a sub-template in the inuniverse parameter. This sub-template isn't a full table though: just a set of extra rows. This works fine with a hand-crafted table style infobox, but not with {{infobox}}. I can see why it doesn't work as-is (the extra data rows are being applied to the wrong template), but can't see that there's a way of fixing this which doesn't require editing every article which uses the feature. Any suggestions? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image sizing

This currently does not set up image_size a parameter used in many infoboxes. Taking {{Infobox Film}} as an example, it currently awkwardly codes for a default as:

|-
{{#if:{{{image|}}}|
{{!}} style="font-size: 95%; line-height:1.5em; text-align: center;" colspan="2"
{{!}} [[Image:{{{image}}}|{{#if:{{{image_size|}}}|<!--then:-->{{px|{{{image_size}}} }}|<!--else:-->200px}}|]]
{{#if:{{{caption|}}}|<br />{{{caption}}}}}
}}

Yet there is a simpler coding using {{px}} which allows for default values (and corrects for image_size parameter being set values in articles with or without a "px" suffix - i.e. "|image_size=250" and "|image_size=250px"). Minor point, break tag should have no space. Hence a neater coding is:

|-
{{#if:{{{image|}}}|
{{!}} style="font-size: 95%; line-height:1.5em; text-align: center;" colspan="2" 
{{!}} [[Image:{{{image}}}|{{px|{{{image_size|}}}|200px}}|]] {{#if:{{{caption|}}}|<br/>{{{caption}}}}}
}}

Davidruben (talk) 03:06, 11 July 2008

Having trouble copying code

When I copy the code from the edit page and paste it into the new template page on my own wiki, I do not yield a working template. I am presented with a page full of "Ifs" and lines, and amidst these is also the infobox.

Any ideas on why this could be? Thanks! 66.174.92.167 (talk) 19:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

If you're seeing the "if"s then that means you need mw:Extension:ParserFunctions installed. There's a chance you might need some other extensions installed as well. A full list of the ones en.wikipedia.org uses can be found at Special:Version. You'll also want to copy Wikipedia:WikiProject Transwiki/MediaWiki:Common.js and Wikipedia:WikiProject Transwiki/MediaWiki:Common.css to your MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css files as well (the first set of links are "clean" Wikipedia copies that should work on other wikis without any problems). Hope that helps. -- Ned Scott 04:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Could some one help me with this??? I created it so that I could tinker around and not have to worry about disrupting this one. I was thinking about adding different things and seeing what people thought and also learning the syntax better, however I have run into a problem with one of my random thoughts. You see, I wanted to make it collapsible, however I don't know the syntax well enough. If anyone could help that would be great, and if you want to leave me a message please do so on my talk page. Thanks, Cra sh Underride 22:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Making `bodyclass=collapsible` look / work right

This would be really handy. I'm not sure where it's going wrong just now, just that it's definitely going wrong. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Installation of Infobox in Mediawiki

I am trying to import some data from wikipedia into my own mediawiki. This data contains the infobox: settlement which doesn't appear correctly. It shows the raw html for everthing in the infobox after the table tag and before the ending table tag, so from

<td colspan="2" align="center"

to the GNIS number

<td>0829911[2]</td> </tr>

I have a hunch that I am missing a template, but when I go to see which templates the page uses, I have them all. I think it could a nested template that I'm missing but I'm not sure which Thanks 68.96.138.80 (talk) 20:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editprotected}} Hi. Please replace the current first line of the code,

<table class="infobox {{{bodyclass|}}}" cellspacing="5" style="width: 22em; text-align: left; font-size: 88%; line-height: 1.5em; {{{bodystyle|}}}"><!--

with the following, which permits the cellspacing entry to be varied:

<table class="infobox {{{bodyclass|}}}" cellspacing="{{{cellspacing|5}}}" style="width:22em; text-align:left; font-size:88%; line-height:1.5em; {{{bodystyle|}}}"><!--

Sardanaphalus (talk) 07:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Not done: Not necessary IIRC: if you just pass |bodystyle=cellspacing:8;, it will override the first value. Happy‑melon 11:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

That's what I thought would work, but it doesn't seem to have any effect. (I've been trying it with {{Infobox Pretenders}}.) Maybe a cellspacing (and cellpadding?) specified outside a "style=" statement takes precedence..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I've tried combining them into the style parameter in {{infobox/sandbox}}. Why don't you have a play and tell me if that works? If not, we'll have to add the bespoke parameter, but I'd really rather not do that. Happy‑melon 20:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Somewhat mysterious template problem

Can anyone here help me figure out why Windmill Theatre has so much white space at the top? I assume it's a template problem but I can't figure out what, and the only template on the page is {{Infobox Theatre}}. Any thoughts? Thanks. Chick Bowen 02:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I have fixed it, probably. --fryed-peach (talk) 05:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Splendid! Thank you. Chick Bowen 15:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Global bump-up for the font scaling

This came up during a recent conversion discussion. The difference between 88% and 90% for the default size does make a noticeable difference to the legibility of the labels at default zoom levels. Could this be bumped to 90% in the first line of code, please? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Strongly support, or larger. See various threads at Template talk:Reflist that discuss 90, 92, or 95% as an absolute minimum on text resizing. (I really wish a web-typography specialist would create a guideline for text sizing recommendations...) -- Quiddity 18:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

(Aside: is useful for brackets following a link, e.g. "(1956–1972)" as it means the brackets are less likely to detract from the point of the template: to provide the links. If/when is too small for some people's eyes, I guess they simply nudge their browsers' default text-size up a notch. (I have that set up on the wheel of the mouse I most often use.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC))

What's that got to do with the proposal here? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Chris, it was just an aside which I've now marked as such. Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose 88% is the only fontsize below the regular fontsize that renders consistently between browsers. In IE, 90% is the same as regular fontsize, making the smaller size not smaller, negating the need for the fontsize to begin with. In Firefox however, 88% and 90% look the same as 88% in IE. — Edokter • Talk • 23:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

...Ah. That might be the reason for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth on Template talk:Infobox UK station. The editors there are evidently keen on the ~10% bump they get in IE for the difference, as opposed to the 2% difference in Firefox. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I've been trying to make the fontsize appear consistent for some time now. If you want to see and show trhe differences in different browsers, use User:Edokter/fonttest. That should be a helpfull tool. — Edokter • Talk • 23:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Now that is a useful page. Linked, with thanks. Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Microformat classes

Unresolved.

Now that this template had been changed to allow the easy addition of microformat classes (for which, thank you), how can the following be achieved?

Add two nested classes, e.g. to render as data
Add a class to whole row, not just the data cell in that row. e.g. <tr class="note"><td>Colour: </td><td>red </td></tr>
Add a class to a data cell, such that, if the data is entered as '''data''', the relevant class is inside the emboldening: [data] or data but not data
Add a span around part of a complex code example, such as {{{name|}}} in above={{{name|}}}{{#if:{{{type|}}}| {{{type|}}}}}

Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The microformat support that was added to this template was done to allow classes to be added to some of the tags that are "hidden" by the template; the table tag, the td tags, and so forth. If you want to insert spans into table data you can do that directly in whatever template is using this metatemplate. For example, you could have

| data1= '''{{{address}}}'''

in your template and the {{infobox}} template should handle that just fine.

The template currently doesn't support adding classes to entire rows, I didn't see any examples of that sort of usage back when I was reading through the microformat documentation so I didn't think it was needed. If it's a rare occurrence perhaps it can be hand-crafted for now? Bryan Derksen (talk) 18:14, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Unfortunately, you missed sevral instances of classes added to whole rows; adding microformats in tables often requires that capability. This was possible in infoboxes, before your changes. How do you suggest that be hand=crafted, where needed? Please will you also answer my points numbered 1, 3 and 4 (with respect to temapltes consturcted using this temaplte, not data entry)? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy Mabbett; Andy Mabbett's contributions 20:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

TBODY

My question about the use of TBODY, asked elsewhere, is particularly relevant to Infoboxes. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I've no experience with the use of tbody, but your intention here looks like it may be a bit too advanced and complex for this template. You may have to custom-craft infoboxes that use those. Bryan Derksen (talk) 18:07, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Template Airport codes

Please see my request for help with Template Airport codes. Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Make Infobox

Resolved.

Does anyone know anything about {{Make Infobox}}? It's used by {{Infobox UKproperty}} and {{Infobox Pub}}, and possibly others. It would seem to duplicate this one, and should perhaps be merged, though it looks like doing so might be complicated. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There are only three templatespace transclusions (the third is {{Infobox Private park}}). It's evidently just a kludgier version of this template, so I'll work on converting the three existing instances tomorrow before taking it to TfD. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There's only one implementation of {{Infobox Pub}} (Hope and Anchor, Islington) and one of {{Infobox Private park}}) (Coulonge Chutes replaced); probably best to just replace, or transclude, then delete them.

There was only one implementation of each of {{Infobox Pub}} and one {{Infobox Private park}}); I've replaced both with better templates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 23:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I've migrated {{Infobox UKproperty}} to {{infobox}} and nominated the others for deletion. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Dual class names not working

It seems that entering titleclass = fn org (as sometimes required for the hCard microformat) does not work; it renders a class of "fn" (see [2]). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 12:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know where you're getting this from. The HTML output of that page is as follows: <caption class="fn org" style="font-size: 125%; font-weight: bold;">Infobox Stadium</caption> That is the correct output. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall what was hapening, but it seems OK now, anyway. Thanks, Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy Mabbett; Andy Mabbett's contributions 20:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Adding a collapsible section?

I've just created a new generic infobox called {{Infobox Sportsperson}}. Is it possible to create a collapsible section using {{Infobox}}, such as the "Medal record" section that appears at the bottom of {{Infobox Swimmer}}? I would very much like to add this feature to {{Infobox Sportsperson}}. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 13:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

This can be faked fairly easily:

| below    = {{#if:{{{medals<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
<table style="width:100%; margin:0" class="collapsible">
<tr>
<th>Medal record</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>{{{medals}}}</td>
</tr>
</table>
}}

I do appreciate that it would be nice to have a more elegant collapsing method in {{infobox}} itself though. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Will add that to the infobox. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Title outside of box

Can we remove the option to have the title outside of the box? There are reports at Template talk:Infobox Book that it causes wrapping issues with long titles using Konqueror. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any discussion of that on the linked template talk: what's the section header? If this is true, it should affect every wikitable on the project which uses a title. That doesn't seem like something which has slipped by people. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Removing support for {{{name}}}

I've been heavily involved in converting random wikitable arrangements into {{infobox}}es for some time now, and I never knew about the existence of the {{{name}}} parameter until today. Is there really a need for this? It doesn't look as good to me as just sticking a {{tnavbar}} directly in the {{{below}}} attribute, has an unintuitive name and function and doesn't appear to be widely employed. I think this should just be yanked in the name of simplicity, with editors always having the option of manually adding a {{navbar}} if required. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The function is the same as in navbox, but here it is optional. It is also well documented. It shouldn't be removed as many infoboxes now rely on it. And since it's optional, it's not really in the way. — Edokter • Talk • 17:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Span misplaced

Not a big issue, but the span in the following section of code is in the wrong place; it needs to be moved inside the if statement for the caption.

[code redacted]

We were getting errors on an external wiki when we imported this due to the lack of Tidy. --Izno (talk) 04:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Master of Puppets (talk · contribs) has kindly

Done this. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Subheader

Some templates, such as {{Infobox character}}, have a subheader to identify the character. {{Infobox animanga character}} and {{Infobox Television episode}} also uses a subheader for similar reasons. So I am requesting that a subheader be added to the infobox.

Below:

<!--
 Header
-->{{#if:{{{above|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" class="{{{aboveclass|}}}" style="text-align:center; font-size: 125%; font-weight: bold; {{{abovestyle|}}}">{{{above}}}</td></tr>}}

Add:

<!--
 Subheader
-->{{#if:{{{subheader|}}}|<tr><td colspan="2" class="{{{subheaderclass|}}}" style="text-align:center; {{{subheaderstyle|}}}">{{{subheader}}}</td></tr>}}

I would also recommend the removal of cellspacing="5" from the table an allow cell spacing to be controlled through CSS via border-spacing instead. --Farix (Talk) 20:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I tried to implement this change, but there are complexities, such as the comment <!-- markers, so it's not clear what "below" means. I checked both the templates that you listed, but neither of them has the word "header" anywhere that I could find. Perhaps implement this first at Template:Infobox/sandbox? --El on ka 00:00, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Here is the diff from the sandbox.[3] I also switched out the cellspacing for border-spacing in the same edit. --Farix (Talk) 00:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

BTW, the other templates don't have a specific field called "header". They do have a name parameter that serves as the header or title for the infobox. Underneath that field is a second line that identifies which work of fiction or series the character or episode is from. I simply used subheader do to lack of a better way to identify that line. --Farix (Talk) 01:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Done, and thanks for doing the extra step. I'm just (understandably, I hope) a bit paranoid about making changes to major templates! --El on ka 01:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

How about calling it top instead of subheader? That may be a more clear. --Farix (Talk) 02:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and made the next change, per request at my talkpage. Though if I'm not around, just go ahead and put up another {{editprotected}} template, and some other admin may be able to get to it quicker. :) --El on ka 04:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Three-column version - please test!

Hey folks,

In searching for a way to hack {{infobox Football biography}} to use an infobox, I ended up having to add new parameters - and thus was born {{infobox3cols}}. This allows for a "data1a" and "data1b" set instead of just "data1" to present two columns of data, so that the club rows in the aforementioned template display properly. This can be rolled into {{infobox}} so we don't have to keep two different designs - any thoughts? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:40, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Define min-width for left column

This infobox has its left column squashed up by the right column of Type (in Firefox), creating needless whitespace. The following CSS code will fix the issue:

.infobox th { min-width: 6.5em; }

Of course, the number will change from infobox to infobox...is it practical, or even possible, to allow inherited templates to specify their own values? --Tom Edwards (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

A better fix is allowing pass-through of the {{{labelstyle}}} parameter. I've added this to {{infobox Software/sandbox}}; test it by changing the Steam article to use that template, and adding the following line to the code: | labelstyle = white-space: nowrap. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

That does the business! --Tom Edwards (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

So, uh, is this going to go into the template? --Tom Edwards (talk) 23:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

You'd need to request it on template talk:infobox Software. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the MedLibrary.org Wikipedia Supplement on Template talk:Infobox/doc -- Please Click to Return to Front Page