Template talk:Botanist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discussion of a change in the template that sets off the author abbreviation for a botanist. Suggestion

The standard author abbreviation {{{1}}} may be used to indicate this person in citing a botanical name.

The reason for the suggested change is that the involvement of a person in the publication of a botanical name may be in one of several ways. He need not have described the plant (or even seen the plant) and need not have published anything. He need not even be a botanist. In fact, the same list applies to names for fungi also: in which case it would be wrong to speak of a "plant". Also, author citation is used for names at any rank, so it may apply to a group of plants like a family rather than any single plant. Still, for whatever part he did play, he may be cited, and there is only the one list of standard abbreviations. By keeping the phrasing as neutral as possible none of these possible ways of involvement is excluded. Brya 15:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm in favor of the change; everything Brya says is correct. It's also more succinct.--Curtis Clark 18:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit request

Note how pic forces botanist tag to bottom of page leaving huge white space (desired position indicated by coloured arrows)

Can someone who knows how to do so, please edit the layout so that the template does not force across the full width of a page below an image, and thus create extensive white space (see e.g. Anders Sandoe Oersted (botanist)) - thanks, MPF 23:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine to me, MPF. Could it be a browser issue? Or has it already been fixed? (a screenshot taken right before this post) -Rkitko 01:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It appears to be an Internet Explorer issue (it looks fine in Firefox). I don't see anything immediately problematic about the HTML, but I'll look closer.--Curtis Clark 03:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It had an extra included div, which is evidently the way Wikipedia deals with making the <center> tag valid XHTML. I moved the centering to an in-line style and now it seems to work. Let me know if there are still problems.--Curtis Clark 03:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Super, works perfectly now, thanks! - MPF 07:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Substitution

Why is this template supposed to be subst-ed? Ardric47 01:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it? I un-subst it wherever I find it, as subst'ing is against the purpose of a template like this.

[edit] Metadata

Why is this "spoiler metadata"? This means that the sentence will not be included in print versions (append ?printable=yes or &printable=yes to the URL of an article using it and it disappears). There should be a better CSS class for this. Kusma (討論) 12:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant?

Is this template redundant with the author_abbreviation_bot option to {{Infobox Scientist}}? True, most of the botanists this is used for don't yet have infoboxes, but it would seem to make more sense to use the existing format than to add a new template to all botanists. grendel|khan 16:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)