Template talk:Infobox Former Country

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
Template This article has been rated as Template-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). Add comments

Please read the instructions before use and before reporting any problems

Archive
Archives
2006-2007


Contents

[edit] Problem with displaying the list of leaders (Tang Dynasty)

I added a list of leaders of the Tang Dynasty, where this template is used. Now, for some reason only the first few leaders are being displayed... I guess I am just to stupid to use it correctly ;-) Any savant got an idea? Tang Wenlong (talk) 01:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another automatic wikilinking issue -- with "dissolution"

I, too, work on disambiguating, and I'm having a lot of hits on "dissolution" from this template. In this case, I don't think any of the identified meanings of "dissolution" fit when talking about an entire country, so the solution discussed before might not work. What can we do here to stop linking to the "dissolution" dab page? Thanks. Auntof6 04:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This comes from people unnecessarily writing "Dissolution" in the event_end field. If nothing is given in this field, it simply says "Disestablished" without linking. The same can be said for saying "Disestablished" - and for saying similar things in the event_start field (where the default there is "Established" without links). So if any articles contain these template values, that field can simply be blanked. - 52 Pickup 17:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! With that info, I was able to finish disambiguating "dissolution". Auntof6 07:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ifexist limt

This template is going to be annhilated by the pending limit on calls to #ifexist. Please rewrite it to make far fewer calls to #ifexist. Dragons flight 00:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing it out. I will try to make a review of it as soon as possible. -- Domino theory 12:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
The call count has been brought down from 194 to 92, just under the 100 limit that is being implemented. The calls performs important functions in the template, but the usage has to be planned more carefully and that should also bring the total number down further. A more comprehensive overhaul should be forthcomming. -- Domino theory 21:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
You need to check the rendered source of the template. It includes a comment of the form:
Pre-expand include size: 131698/2048000 bytes
Post-expand include size: 50777/2048000 bytes
Template argument size: 28650/2048000 bytes
#ifexist count: 111/2000
This provides a total of all ifexist calls in this template and the templates it depends on. Right now the total is still 111. In other words, this is still over the limit. Keep in mind that the limit is per page, not per template. Dragons flight 22:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
You're right! I had problems with the page cache so I checked different articles and they all gave the number 92. I have verified your figures and they are presently at 111 for the template itself. I realize the count is per page and that other templates might also use the #ifexist call, and that's why I would like to reduce it substantially. I will bring it down under 100 in the comming days, but a more effective use (less use) of the call will only be possible after a more comprehensive overhaul. Thank you again for bringing this to attention. Cheers, -- Domino theory 22:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Footnote beside flag link?

Hello, discussion is running hot 'n heavy over at Occupation of Japan over the flag in this template. There was no de jure official flag of Japan at any time from 1885 until 1999. However, the Hinomaru or "Rising Sun" flag was clearly the de facto flag of Japan at all relevant times. It gets worse.. use of the Hinomaru was severely restricted during early parts of the occupation, but the restrictions were completely lifted a couple years before the occupation ended. The flag that is being used in the template at this moment (it may change by the time you read this) is not even close to being an official flag; it is a naval ensign. I suggest using the Hinomaru with a footnote to a lengthy and well-referenced discussion. I dunno if that solution will reflect consensus, but at present this template does not support the addition of a footnote in the place I would like to see it [beside the "Flag" link]... Thanks! Ling.Nut 06:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Use flag_type to put "[[Flag of Japan|Flag]]&sup1 ;" and footnotes for "&sup1 ; {The note on the flag.}". Remember that the footnotes or the infobox in general is meant for very brief information, so place the extended explanation in the article or in the Flag of Japan article. Cheers, -- Domino theory 12:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I didn't folllow your advice, but it helped me see what to do: rather than use the footnote param of the template, I used a link to a named footnote in the Notes:
|flag = Occupation_of_Japan#_note-flag
|flag_type = Flag&sup1 ;
  • thanks! Ling.Nut 13:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks fine to me. :) The only issue I have is that the infobox now is used to display "no flag". The best way would be to either show a flag, unofficial or not, or not to show a flag at all. However the discussion and the footnote about the flag is still as important. Until there is a better solution it's also ok to use Sin bandera.svg for flag navigation in other infoboxes, eg preceding/succeeding. Cheers, -- Domino theory 16:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Problem in the Soviet Union article

Only first 12 out of 15 (or 16) successor states included in the infobox are visible. Alæxis¿question? 12:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Still There are 17 entities and not all of them display. Can someone fix this? -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
The code has now been extended to 15. I have not extended it further because there is an unnecessary amount of duplication in the 17 states currently listed and to include all 17 doesn't make any sense. Entities that comprise the same territory should not be listed. The 17 entries currently listed are:
  1. Commonwealth of Independent States
  2. Russia
  3. Belarus
  4. Ukraine
  5. Moldova
  6. Georgia
  7. Armenia
  8. Azerbaijan
  9. Kazakhstan
  10. Uzbekistan
  11. Turkmenistan
  12. Kyrgyzstan
  13. Tajikistan
  14. Estonia
  15. Lithuania
  16. Latvia
  17. Union of Russia and Belarus
A few points:
  • Union of Russia and Belarus is a clear duplication, since it contains Russia and Belarus. So either the union should be listed or the individual countries.
  • Similarly, the CIS comprises most of the countries listed. So again: one or the other. You could just as easily list only the CIS and the non-CIS countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania)
  • All now-existing countries are directly related to previous Soviet states (eg. Ukrainian SSR → Ukraine) and the entries for these Soviet states have similar infoboxes that link to the now-existing states.
So without the CIS and the Russia/Belarus Union, that makes 15. This is the maximum number of states that does not lead to duplication. So please now reduce the states listed to either this 15 or to 4 (CIS, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) 52 Pickup (deal) 15:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with "Event" headers

This template includes default headers "Established" and "Disestablished" that are links to pages of the same titles. Apparently this is done through inclusion of the {{WPFCevent}} template, which automatically links headers if the corresponding page exists. Unfortunately, however, Established redirects to a disambiguation page, and none of the links on that page is relevant to the usage here; and Disestablished redirects to Disestablishmentarianism, which is an entirely irrelevant article. Please fix the template code so that it no longer links to inappropriate articles. --Russ (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. I've just added a switch to WPFCevent that first checks for certain words and then does not create links if these words are used. So if you see any other problem words in future, they can simply be added to this switch. - 52 Pickup (talk) 18:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kingdom of Montenegro

There seems to be a problem, at the 1910 area estimate it add "
". What is that? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal

Why not add heads of legislatures? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The main reason is that the infobox is long enough already. - 52 Pickup (deal) 16:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some help please?

I'd like to use Template: Infobox Former Country in the New Hebrides article, but it doesn't work quite right because it doesn't allow for a territory being a colony of two countries rather than one. How can I solve this problem? Can anyone help me? Btn551 (talk) 03:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The New Hebrides was a condominium shared between Britain and France. Condominiums are presently classified as "Special territory". For an example of a condominium with an infobox see Moresnet. Categories for Former British and French colonies can be added separately. -- Domino theory (talk) 11:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] transcluding categorization is evil

We should avoid having templates force articles into categories. For example, Kingdom of Kongo is duly categorized into Category:Former monarchies of Africa. This template additionally puts it into Category:Former countries in Africa. This is unwanted, because the former is already a subcategory of the latter. dab (𒁳) 15:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Likewise, I would prefer it if it didn't force articles into Category:XXXX disestablishments, since not all former countries are "former" because they were disestablished (they became subdivisions instead). --Ptcamn (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
But their time as an independent entity ended, hence the "disestablishment". Back to the first comment, what would be better, just the monarchies category or the countries category? - 52 Pickup (deal) 07:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Top level domain and other codes

It seems that this template lacks former ISO country code, top level internet domain code (TLD), telephone calling code and maybe others. Do you think that these codes should be in the infobox or in the article text? --pabouk (talk) 09:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Since only a small number of former countries would have this information, the template does indeed not have this information, and there are currently no plans to add them. At the moment, it has been standard to place these as footnotes within the infobox (e.g. see Soviet Union). - 52 Pickup (deal) 10:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New parameters align Firefox/MSIE boxstyle and titlestyle

08-April-2008: To allow customization of the title-bar and the infobox background, I have added 2 new parameters inside the style="xxx" properties lists. The style can be changed either for the whole infobox or also for the title/name area:

  • the whole infobox uses style="... {{{boxstyle|}}}" and
  • the title/name section uses style="... {{{titlestyle|}}}"

For example, using titlestyle=background:lightgray will set the background color behind the name data. Also, using boxstyle=left-margin:1px will re-align the infobox for similarity in both browsers Firefox and MS Internet Explorer (MSIE). Maintaining similar formatting between Firefox and MSIE is all very complicated, so adjusting the style properties helps: view the article "Kingdom of Gwynedd" in both browsers to note the shift of the infobox. Adjusting the infobox style in other browsers might help maintain similarity in those browsers as well. Only 2 lines inside the template were changed (just below "Infobox proper begins") to implement the new parameters. I tested the changes in my user space before copying into the live template. -Wikid77 (talk) 04:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Customisation of infobox colours was discussed long ago and rejected. Infoboxes are aimed towards standardisation of articles, not individual decoration. {{Infobox Country}} does not have such a feature, so neither should this template. Give people the option to change colours and that opens up a whole new mess of problems with the template's usage (and abuse). And the purple and green currently used for the Gwynedd article is, well, awful. It is true that there is a shift in part of the infobox when using IE, and I have not yet been able to come up with a lasting solution, but allowing individual customisation does not appear to be the answer, and is likely to create more problems than it solves.
Fixing drift: yes please. Further customisation: absolutely not. - 52 Pickup (deal) 06:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
The purple and green for the Kingdom of Gwynedd has been changed to purple and metalic gold. Also, the Principality of Wales displays green and metalic gold, while the kingdom of Powys. The kingdom of Deheubarth may most likely be blue and gold. o be truthful, the idea that editors should not be entrusted to edit a country box is shortsighted. Adding color to the info box allows for standardized information to be given while also stimulating the eye with well constructed colorful borders and titles. Why else was it allowed that templates for Islands may allow this? It distinguishes the info box.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 03:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Not short-sighted, just experience. And there's a difference between stimulating the eye and distracting the reader from the article text, which is always more important than any infobox. Well-constructed borders and titles are great, but with this change, they are not well-constructed and look rather amateurish. Perhaps there is a way to improve the appearance, but this isn't it. A similar discussion is taking place over at Template talk:Infobox Country#Wales country specific infobox so, to prevent duplication, I suggest that discussion should continue there. 52 Pickup (deal) 07:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Just raising my objection over the use of colours in this infobox. I would urge a revert whilst we discuss per WP:BRD. --Jza84 |  Talk  13:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
{{Infobox Country}} was reverted. Hence, so should this box. —MJCdetroit (yak) 20:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Portuguese Timor

There are some issues explained on the talk page. A user is hoping to modify the template because (as I understand it, I'm not involved) it does not have enough parameters to show how Portuguese Timor was not a formal colony during part of its occupation. I'm sure he/she can explain it better for you, but I told the user I would ask. Thanks! SGGH speak! 21:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image map caption

Hello, is there a way to increase the size of the text contained in the "image_map_caption". The legend at Moresnet is currently practically unreadable. Cheers, Str1977 (talk) 13:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I used a couple <Big> </Big> tags and rigged it to work. Hope that helps. —MJCdetroit (yak) 04:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely. Thanks. Str1977 (talk) 23:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Before-after doesn't work

The before-after of ALL former countries - if there are more than one of either -- do not show up. Clicking on the arrow does nothing but add "#before-after" to the URL. This seems to be a problem only on those infoboxes with more than four successors or predecessors. Rcduggan (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I also am experiencing the same problem, if there are multiple successors or predacessors, nothing appears when clicking the arrow.--R-41 (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
From digging through the code, it looks like the template was designed to only display 4 before/afters. If 5 or more were entered, the template would insert an arrow down and try to redirect the reader to a section called "before-after". Problem was if that section didn't exist, nothing would happen. It is up to an editor to create that section in the article and somehow place information with that section; the infobox will not do that automatically. I thought that no one would name a section with a lowercase letter so I changed the code to "Before-after" (it can be reverted if needed). Please, see Kingdom of Italy. It's the best that I could come up with and it took a hell of a lot longer than I thought it would. Good Luck. —MJCdetroit (yak) 04:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The arrow thing used to work perfectly. Someone changed the coding or something because now the before-and-after section is a disaster and just plain irritating. Could someone PLEASE revert the coding to the latest time when the before-and-after sections worked.--R-41 (talk) 19:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Reverted —MJCdetroit (yak) 00:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
It still isn't working, I guess either it's going to have to be reverted farther back in time.--R-41 (talk) 23:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Extra }}??

I'm not sure but there may be an extra set of close curly brackets here:
    |Afroeurasia= ... [[Category:Former monarchies}}|{{{common_name}}}, {{{year_start}}}]]
at [[Category:Former monarchies>>>}}<<<
Aflin (talk) 19:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)