AlasdairEdits (talk | contribs) →Oppose: Reply |
→Support: rp |
||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
===Support=== |
===Support=== |
||
*'''Support''' I agree with {{noping|My name is not dave}}'s comments, it's a helpful indicator. IHDI is widely used in academic work, inferring it has a fair degree of creditability. There is an FAQ page by the UNDP which explains what IHDI shows here: [http://hdr.undp.org/en/faq-page/inequality-adjusted-human-development-index-ihdi]. [[User:Rob984|Rob984]] ([[User talk:Rob984|talk]]) 10:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
*'''Support''' I agree with {{noping|My name is not dave}}'s comments, it's a helpful indicator. IHDI is widely used in academic work, inferring it has a fair degree of creditability. There is an FAQ page by the UNDP which explains what IHDI shows here: [http://hdr.undp.org/en/faq-page/inequality-adjusted-human-development-index-ihdi]. [[User:Rob984|Rob984]] ([[User talk:Rob984|talk]]) 10:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
*'''Support''' Appears a relevant addition. It does seem to overcome the overemphasis on economic equality from GINI. [[User:Arnoutf|Arnoutf]] ([[User talk:Arnoutf|talk]]) 10:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
===Oppose=== |
===Oppose=== |
Revision as of 10:04, 5 August 2017
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Countries Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
Flag width
The flag_width
parameter is either poorly documented or isn't working as intended. I would expect it change the width of the flag image, but all it does is change the width of the <td>
which contains it, which has no effect other than to move it around within the layout. Either this should be changed so that the image is actually scaled by the parameter or the documentation should be changed to reflect the fact that it merely changes the box's width.
I would also note that the corresponding parameter for the symbol/coat of arms (symbol_width
) does change that image's width, suggesting to me that this is an error rather than poor documentation. From what I can tell it does so using the code |size={{{symbol_width|}}}
within {{#invoke:InfoboxImage|...}}
.
Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- To editor Alphathon: I think you're correct in that there has been an error for at least since last April, 2016, even before conversion and before the merge discussion. I hesitate to make the change I've placed in the sandbox, since there is still a template merge in progress. I tested the change and it does work, but it might be just a temporary fix, and other editors might be able to do it better. Paine Ellsworth put'r there 12:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- To editors Frietjes, Primefac and Jonesey95: I'd like to maybe get you to look at the sandbox to see if my flag_width change is okay within the merge process, or if it can be done better? (I'm not happy with the way both flag and CoA get pushed to the left border when
|flag_width=
is used.) Paine Ellsworth put'r there 12:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)- @Paine Ellsworth and Alphathon: I implemented the change, but in a slightly different way. checking the documentation, it mentions using "%" units for the flag size, which I do not think works with Module:InfoboxImage. so, that may be something to fix. Frietjes (talk) 13:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Frietjes! Paine Ellsworth put'r there 13:13, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Paine Ellsworth and Alphathon: I implemented the change, but in a slightly different way. checking the documentation, it mentions using "%" units for the flag size, which I do not think works with Module:InfoboxImage. so, that may be something to fix. Frietjes (talk) 13:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Year field for religion demographics?
The religion field is now often being used for demographics (see United Kingdom, European Union, etc.) but lacks a field for adding the year in brackets next to it, unlike the ethnic groups section. Could someone please add a religion_year
field? i.e:
Replace
| label17 = Religion | data17 = {{{religion|}}}
with
| label17 = Religion <!-- -->{{#if:{{{religion_year|}}} |<span style="font-weight:normal;">({{{religion_year}}})</span>}} | data17 = {{{religion|}}}
Thanks,
Rob984 (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
- Am I correct in understanding that, unlike the ethnic groups field, the religion field is typically only used for countries with an official religion (e.g., England, Sweden, Saudi Arabia)? If so, there's no reason to have a year parameter added. 142.160.131.202 (talk) 23:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
- Typically it is used for either. Many use it for data, e.g. United Kingdom, France, United States, European Union, Germany, and Spain. Maybe there should be a separate field for "State religion", but regardless, adding an optional year field doesn't affect articles using it for specifying a state religion. Rob984 (talk) 00:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
- seems fine as an optional parameter, so now done! Frietjes (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you! Rob984 (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- seems fine as an optional parameter, so now done! Frietjes (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- Typically it is used for either. Many use it for data, e.g. United Kingdom, France, United States, European Union, Germany, and Spain. Maybe there should be a separate field for "State religion", but regardless, adding an optional year field doesn't affect articles using it for specifying a state religion. Rob984 (talk) 00:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Coat of arms in mobile site too small
In desktop flag and coat of arms have same height, can someone fix it? Hddty. (talk) 04:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
- The mobile website ignores table structure styling and shrinks images that don't fit on the page.
I figured out a fix which largely alleviates the problem by adding a div around the COA/symbol with its width specified as the default width of the COA/symbol (85px). See diff and test cases: mobile desktop. Ideally, this should really match the width of the COA/symbol if it has been specified withRob984 (talk) 11:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC) Actually I made a better solution, just replacing the table with divs. See diff and test cases: mobile desktop. Rob984 (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2017 (UTC)symbol_width
, but that's a little complicated because it's a sub-template.- @Hddty. and Rob984: looks good to me, so now implemented. thank you! Frietjes (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Can you edit Template:Infobox former country too. Thank you. Hddty. (talk) 19:43, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hddty., I ported the subtable code from this template to that template, which should also help with the merger (whenever that happens). Frietjes (talk) 14:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: Can you edit Template:Infobox former country too. Thank you. Hddty. (talk) 19:43, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Hddty. and Rob984: looks good to me, so now implemented. thank you! Frietjes (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Pronunciation parameter
Could a pronunciation parameter be added to this template, please? This is data that should be in the infobox. Thanks Jytdog (talk) 21:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 11 July 2017
Change:
([[List of countries by population|{{{population_estimate_rank}}}]])}}
to
([[List of countries and dependencies by population|{{{population_estimate_rank}}}]])}}
Change:
([[List of countries by population|{{{population_census_rank}}}]])}}
to
([[List of countries and dependencies by population|{{{population_census_rank}}}]])}}
Change:
([[List of sovereign states and dependent territories by population density|{{{population_density_rank}}}]])}}
to
([[List of countries and territories by population density|{{{population_density_rank}}}]])}}
So that we link to the list pages accurately. Rcsprinter123 (address) 19:58, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- probably done, let me know if I missed one. Frietjes (talk) 21:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Frietjes: All done fine, thanks. Rcsprinter123 (message) 16:44, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Add IHDI for countries which have a rating, along with HDI?
The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index is spoken by the UNHDP as the 'true' level of human development, with inequality added. This renders the current and more popular HDI as just a potential human development indicator, if there was little or no inequality. Currently there is the Gini index, which only reflects upon the country's economic inequality and nothing else. I consider the IHDI to the most helpful factor of informing readers about the true human development of a country, and would be a worthy addition to the infobox. Would like thoughts. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hmm, there has been a lack of response to this. I will set up an RfC to generate some discussion. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 16:20, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Should the IHDI be included in the infobox along with the HDI? See my rationale above. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 16:20, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Support
- Support I agree with My name is not dave's comments, it's a helpful indicator. IHDI is widely used in academic work, inferring it has a fair degree of creditability. There is an FAQ page by the UNDP which explains what IHDI shows here: [1]. Rob984 (talk) 10:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
- Support Appears a relevant addition. It does seem to overcome the overemphasis on economic equality from GINI. Arnoutf (talk) 10:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose if something is going to be placed in the infobox for countries there should be a very good reason why. I think the box already includes too many things, but adding another one won't help. Why should this measure be given unusual weight and prominence over other measures. I don't think a good case has been presented that it should AlasdairEdits (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Threaded discussion
Fix text sizes in violation of WP:ACCESS
Per WP:ACCESS, text sizes should not "drop below 85% of the page font size (or 11px)".
The article body text size (by default) is 14px.
This infobox's font size is set to 88%. Rounded to the nearest .05px (as browsers do):
- 88% of 14px is 12.3px
However, within the infobox, some font sizes are further reduced to 85% of this:
- 85% of 12.3px is 10.45px
10.45px is less then 11px, so in violation of WP:ACCESS. To fix this, any cases of font-size=85%
, {{small|
or <small>
should be replaced with font-size=90%
, since:
- 90% of 12.3px is 11.1px
11.1px is still visually distinctly smaller then the rest of the text in the infobox.
I know this is a small difference, but these font-sizes are too small in my opinion (it's only just legible to me and I'm in my twenties with OK vision). I would probably prefer everything other then the footnotes to be left at the infobox's standard font-size, but at the very least to have compliance with WP:ACCESS.
I've made the change in the the sandbox (diff & testcases) and the improvement is noticeable. It doesn't appear to cause any problems. If the request is accepted, please note that the sandbox uses Template:Infobox country/imagetable/sandbox in place of Template:Infobox country/imagetable (diff). Make sure to remove the "/sandbox" when syncing it to the main space.
Thanks,
Rob984 (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The request is reasonable IMO. --Izno (talk) 18:07, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- now done. Frietjes (talk) 19:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Fix for flag_caption not working when it is not linked
If Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}}
doesn't exist, the infobox will just display "Flag" unlinked. In the code, flag_caption
currently only modifies the linked caption, so it doesn't work on articles where the caption is not linked. |Flag
just needs to be changed to |{{{flag_caption|Flag}}}
.
I.e., change:
|caption1= {{#ifexist:Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}} |[[Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}}|{{{flag_caption|Flag}}}]] |Flag }}
to:
|caption1= {{#ifexist:Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}} |[[Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}}|{{{flag_caption|Flag}}}]] |{{{flag_caption|Flag}}} }}
Thanks.
Rob984 (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Rob984, should work now. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 14:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Rob984, I just checked {{infobox former country}} and for that template,
|flag_caption=
overrides all automatic linking/captioning. should we do the same here? Frietjes (talk) 14:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC).- Thanks Frietjes
- Could you make if so it checks for a link using the provided flag caption, but otherwise has no link? i.e.:
{{#ifexist:{{{flag_caption|Flag}}} of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}}
- Things are a little confusing at {{infobox former country}}.
flag_caption
is unlinked, whileflag_type
is linked as:
[[Flag of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name}}}}}}|{{if empty|{{{flag_type|}}}|Flag}}]]
- I think these should really be the same and again linked as:
{{#ifexist:{{{flag_type|{{{flag_caption|Flag}}}}}} of {{{linking_name|{{{common_name}}}}}}
- Also, by the way,
flag_caption
is missing from the "Check for unknown parameters". - Rob984 (talk) 14:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, and this is the way that symbol_type works on both templates. Rob984 (talk) 14:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Rob984, the syntax is definitely a mess. (1)
|symbol_type_article=
makes sense, but there is no equivalent|flag_article_type=
, (2)|symbol_type=
makes sense, but there is no equivalent|flag_type=
in this template, (3) it looks like I added the|flag_caption=
and|symbol_caption=
to the former country template when I upgraded it to use the imagetable template, in an attempt to have it better match this template. so, those parameters are probably not being used (or are very rarely used). I, personally, think that|flag_caption=
should mean the caption for the flag image, and|flag_type=
should allow you to change the text "flag" to say "former flag" or "old flag" or whatever. perhaps the best thing to do at this point is to figure out how|flag_type=
and|flag_caption=
are being used in the articles to make sure we don't break anything when/if we change the syntax? Frietjes (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2017 (UTC)- @Frietjes Honestly there's just too many different parameters and I don't even know what they do. I think it's just easier to have a single field for modifying the flag caption and another for modifying the symbol caption.
- Right now
symbol_type
works perfectly for modifying the symbol's caption in both infoboxes. If you don't use it, the template defaults to "Coat of arms" or (if exists) "[[Coat of arms of [country name]|Coat of arms]]". If you set it to something like "Royal Banner", it produces "Royal Banner" or (if exists) "[[Royal Banner of [country name]|Royal Banner]]". If you set it to something like "[[Coat of arms of [country name]|Coat of arms]] (1800-1900)" it's going to show that and not try to link it. This is very straight forward. Potentially the only problem is an undesired link, whereby [[Coat of arms of [country name]]] exists but isn't applicable to the article, so maybe a "symbol_link=none" parameter could be implemented to override it. Though I've never had that problem. I thinkflag_type
andflag_caption
should be the same thing and should work the same assymbol_type
does currently. This way there's no need for any other fields.
- Rob984, the syntax is definitely a mess. (1)
- To give you an example, at the article Republic of Ireland,
linking_name
is set to "the Republic of Ireland" so that links such as "Politics of the Republic of Ireland" are generated. However both the flag and coat of arms caption's should direct to "of Ireland" articles. - To prevent these linking to redirects rather then the actual article I set
|symbol_type = [[Coat of arms of Ireland|Coat of arms]]
, and it works perfectly. However if I do the same for the flag:|flag_caption = [[Flag of Ireland|Flag]]
it doesn't work and still tries to pipe it producing: [[Flag of the Republic of Ireland|[[Flag of Ireland|Flag]]]].
- To give you an example, at the article Republic of Ireland,
- Implementing something like
flag_caption_article
to change the linked article has a limitation: you might not want to link the whole caption (for example "[[Flag of [country name]|Flag]] (1800-1900)"). Also, it's just not very intuitive. Whereas it is to just have the template intelligently check if "[Flag /flag_caption
] of [county name]" is linkable or not, and allow editors to manually link the caption themselves. And frankly, any cases infoboxes auto-linking should have a if-exists condition to prevent unwanted linking. - Rob984 (talk) 20:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Here's another example of where I'm having a problem with the auto-linking: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Helena,_Ascension_and_Tristan_da_Cunha&diff=793604851&oldid=792645889
- The article Flag of Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha exists but the caption should actually link to Flag of the United Kingdom. There should be an if-exist condition so that the infobox produces the desired output "[[Flag of the United Kingdom]]", rather than "[[Flag of Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha|[[Flag of the United Kingdom]]]]". This way the editor doesn't even have to think about it, they just link the caption as they want it linked in order to override the infobox's default behaviour.
- Rob984 (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Rob984, I agree we should try to simplify the syntax if possible. I am definitely not opposed to simplify where possible. do you have any suggested replacement code? we could try to emulate {{infobox settlement}} which has far more transclusions than this template. Frietjes (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Implementing something like