User talk:Netoholic/Infobox Language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Example
| Chinese 漢語 Hànyǔ, 中文 Zhōngwén |
||
|---|---|---|
| Zhōngwén in written Chinese: |
 |
|
| Spoken in: | People's Republic of China (mainland China, Hong Kong, Macao), Republic of China (Taiwan and other islands), Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Burma, Cambodia, Malaysia, also parts of Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Philippines & other Chinese communities around the world (majorities): Eastern Asia & parts of Southern Asia (minorities): Chinese communities in Western Asia, the Americas, Africa, Europe and Pacific |
|
| Total speakers: | more than 1.3 billion | |
| Ranking: | 1 (if considered a single language) | |
| Language family: | Sino-Tibetan | |
| Official status | ||
| Official language of: | PRC, ROC, Singapore, United Nations | |
| Regulated by: | In the PRC: various agencies(in Chinese) In the ROC: Mandarin Promotion Council In Singapore: Promote Mandarin Council/Speak Mandarin Campaign [1] |
|
| Language codes | ||
| ISO 639-1: | zh | |
| ISO 639-2: | chi (B) | zho (T) |
| ISO 639-3: | variously: cdo — Min Dong cjy — Jinyu cmn — Mandarin cpx — Pu-Xian czh — Huizhou czo — Min Zhong dng — Dungan gan — Gan hak — Hakka hsn — Xiang mnp — Min Bei nan — Min Nan wuu — Wu yue — Yue |
|
| Note: This page may contain IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode. See IPA chart for English for an English-based pronunciation key. | ||
[edit] Thoughts on this template
Hi, Netoholic. Your approach here seems to be good. I realise that {{language}} is not to your liking because of WP:AUM. However, that template was built over time by linguists, and has been thoroughly tested. This group should be involved in the development of a replacement template. I removed your application of this template from Arabic language as it is obviously not ready to be used. Thank you for your work in trying to improve this template. --Gareth Hughes 16:07, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- Template:Language is in severe violation of the Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates policy. I am working on a replacement and will begin migrating articles to it. The format and variable names are in line with the current scheme, with one major exception. The "familycolor" classification is entirely original research. That "feature" is also at the root of most meta-template problems with the present language template.
- I am going to begin migrating articles, with careful attention that no information is lost. Because of that, there is no reason for you to violate the ppolicy by reverting my conversions. -- Netoholic @ 17:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point is also a guideline. As you have discussed this migration with no other editor, and especially with those erditors who use the template, you are being disruptive. We are linguists, and understand the flexibility that's needed. We feel that it's important to colour code the template to mark language family. This was happening before logic templates were being used, but your new creation does not apply them. Until we get a proper discussion of this, the migration should stop. --Gareth Hughes 18:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Dude, following the developer's directive and working towards a non-meta-template version is not disrupting Wikipedia and is not making any point. Reverting my attempts to reduce meta-templates certainly can lead to disruption of Wikipedia, though. Stop being elitist ("We are linguists") and come here in the spirit of cooperation. If you can't do that, then sit back and let others make the necessary conversions. -- Netoholic @ 09:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
-
Netoholic is correct here - it is very, very important to deal with these templates. The developers specifically asked the community to reduce usage of meta-templates. It sounds like Netoholic is giving an equivalently functional template, if perhaps one that is mildly harder to use. Regardless, by your own account you were able to do language colors before implementing meta-templates. Instead of reverting Netoholic's changes to your template, please just add the language color back in as it used to be. Phil Sandifer 15:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
- I do not stand against WP:AUM. I am angry that this user is taking as a mandate to dictate terms to other users. He had started to implement his new template without announcement to other users, let alone consensus. As someone who has been deeply involved in the development and use of this template, I expect to be involved in the development of a more server-friendly template. No, Netoholic is not correct here: yes, it is very, very important to deal with these templates. I have invited Netoholic to work with others to develop this template, but he wants to do it alone. Important changes (like a new template) should be discussed before they are implemented: this is always the way. You might say that WP:AUM mandates these changes: it mandates changes, but not necessarily these. As such, I would prefer it if the policy was not used as such a cudgel. --Gareth Hughes 17:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- Removing mete-templates is a mandate... from the developers. I never said I wanted to do it alone. No one from your project stepped forward to help remove the meta-templates from the existing Template:Language, and so I had to start somewhere. This template is that starting point and a place for me to demostrate my techniques. I implemented it on exactly four articles, and you reverted. -- Netoholic @ 18:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- It is NOT mandate. the thing is called WP:AUM not WP:DUM or WP:NUM (don't use meta templates / never user metatemplates) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] On what is 'broken'
Netoholic, unless the non-meta template does what the meta version did it isn't going to be accepted. You have argued that the color system employed for languages is 'original research' and you are therefor seeking to remove it. Likewise, you are arguing that there should be multiple language templates for different kinds of languages (natural vs constructed). You are trying to veto these and other things under the guise of WP:AUM, but that doesn't fly. The WP:AUM policy doesn't give you carte blanche to accept or reject any and every aspect of a template. You have falsely stated that these things can't be done without using meta-templates... I have shown that they can be. Yet you continue to reject and remove them. At this point it is you who is standing in the way of removing this meta-template... by insisting that what replaces it conform to your stylistic preferences. As 'coders' our task should be to replicate the original as closely as possible... not to seek to place our judgement of how things should look/work above that of the linguists, zoologists, historians, et cetera. If these other issues are really significant concerns then the large and active communities who work in those areas can sort them out after we've gone. --CBD ☎ ✉ 12:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- If I were only a "coder", perhaps I would agree, but I am also an editor and I believe the color idea to be flawed. I have posted on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages#The bad side of colors. I can (and may have to) make this template work with colors, but I will not edit it to use any meta-templates and I will remove such functions, per WP:AUM. And just in case it's not absolutely clear, any reliance on template:language/familycolor is not acceptable. -- Netoholic @ 17:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, as an editor you can state your opinion about the colors... but you can't make claims that your opinion must be followed due to WP:AUM. You are attempting to leverage that policy to force acceptance of your opinions on unrelated matters (to the point of seeking sanctions against people disagreeing with those opinions) and that is completely inappropriate. It doesn't matter that you find Template:Language/familycolor "not acceptable" if there is a consensus in disagreement. Stick to fixing meta-templates and stating your views on other issues... rather than trying to combine the two. Making changes to templates "per WP:AUM" when there are no meta-templates involved just isn't kosher. --CBD ☎ ✉ 18:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- It is only due to the fact that meta-templates were employed to create this functionality that we're here to talk about it. While I have a specific objection to the use of colors on this template, I also have a major technical challenge to overcome... The only way to use colors without using a meta-template is to adjust every article to add a "color=" parameter. That is a major task and one that is hard to maintain. Because of that, it is time to weigh the benefits and costs of that scheme to see if this is even necessary. -- Netoholic @ 18:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, as an editor you can state your opinion about the colors... but you can't make claims that your opinion must be followed due to WP:AUM. You are attempting to leverage that policy to force acceptance of your opinions on unrelated matters (to the point of seeking sanctions against people disagreeing with those opinions) and that is completely inappropriate. It doesn't matter that you find Template:Language/familycolor "not acceptable" if there is a consensus in disagreement. Stick to fixing meta-templates and stating your views on other issues... rather than trying to combine the two. Making changes to templates "per WP:AUM" when there are no meta-templates involved just isn't kosher. --CBD ☎ ✉ 18:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Announcement
I am kindly requesting all interested parties to review discussion regarding this template on my talk page: User talk:Ezhiki#Infobox:Language issues and User talk:Ezhiki#Infobox:Language proposed solution. I realize that I should have announced it a lot earlier than this, but I did not expect the discussion to take as long as it did. Your attention and comments will be much appreciated.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 16:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] CSS hack reduces accessibility
This version of the template injects a bunch of junk code into the web page, and hides it using CSS. I understand that there is an alternative way of recoding these templates ("weeble method"), but the CSS hack is being implemented because it is slightly easier for editors. This hack injects junk code into the body of the page, then hides it from most visual browsers using CSS.
This makes Wikipedia much less accessible for users of assistive technologies, like web page readers for the handicapped, and text browsers. This is sloppy programming and bad practice from the point of view of web page accessibility, web page usability, and standards implementation. Wikipedia is an open encyclopedia; please lets not start treating the minority who has the most difficult time reading like second-class citizens. —Michael Z. 2006-01-16 17:51 Z
Here is the actual text of the example above, with the "hiddenstructure" revealed; the junk text which is hidden from visual browsers, but what handicapped readers would have to deal with, at the beginning of an article. —Michael Z.
- Are you sure? Netoholic had claimed that this code actually looked 'pretty good' in Lynx... and obviously that wouldn't qualify. I'd seen a display of Template:Taxobox in Lynx which just had a few extra rows with undefined parameters. Of course, the taxobox template isn't quite as complicated as the language template. BTW, there is a version of 'taxobox' done entirely in 'Weeble' code at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox3 for comparison to the current CSS version. --CBD ☎ ✉ 20:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- Below are the lynx renderings (version 2.8.4rel.1) of a journal reference in T-34#references, and the example at the top of this discussion page [I put in dummy links for an accurate representation]. —Michael Z. 2006-01-16 23:20 Z
{{Journal reference}} in Lynx, example from "T-34" (yes, the wikilink brackets really show up in the text):
* [[|Para, Carl]], () (April 2002). [ Military Heritage feature on
the T-34]. Military Heritage 3 (5): pp.18-20, 22-23. .
{{Infobox Language}} in Lynx, example from the top of this talk page:
English ()
{{{image}}}
Used in: {{{region}}}
Used by: First language: about 380 million
Second language: 150-1,000 million
Language extinction: --
Ranking: 3 or 4 as a native language (in a near tie with Spanish) and
2 in overall speakers
Genetic classification: Indo-European
Germanic
West Germanic
Anglo-Frisian
Anglic
English
English
English
English
English
English
English
English
English
English
Official status
Official language of: {{{official}}}
Regulated by: {{{agency}}}
Language codes
ISO 639-1: en
ISO 639-2: eng
ISO/DIS 639-3: eng --
{{{lc1}}} -- [[{{{ll1}}}|{{{ld1}}}]]
{{{lc2}}} -- [[{{{ll2}}}|{{{ld2}}}]]
{{{lc3}}} -- [[{{{ll3}}}|{{{ld3}}}]]
{{{lc4}}} -- [[{{{ll4}}}|{{{ld4}}}]]
{{{lc5}}} -- [[{{{ll5}}}|{{{ld5}}}]]
{{{lc6}}} -- [[{{{ll6}}}|{{{ld6}}}]]
{{{lc7}}} -- [[{{{ll7}}}|{{{ld7}}}]]
{{{lc8}}} -- [[{{{ll8}}}|{{{ld8}}}]]
{{{lc9}}} -- [[{{{ll9}}}|{{{ld9}}}]]
{{{lc10}}} -- [[{{{ll10}}}|{{{ld10}}}]]
{{{lc11}}} -- [[{{{ll1}}}|{{{ld11}}}]]
{{{lc12}}} -- [[{{{ll2}}}|{{{ld12}}}]]
{{{lc13}}} -- [[{{{ll3}}}|{{{ld13}}}]]
{{{lc14}}} -- [[{{{ll14}}}|{{{ld14}}}]]
Note: This page may contain IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode.
EVERYONE - in order to quash this ForestFire, please follow-up discussion at MediaWiki talk:Common.css#CSS hack reduces accessibility. -- Netoholic @ 19:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
