Template talk:Infobox Language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

purge

Archive Archives

Contents

[edit] Template/table badly broken

The content of Template:Infobox Language/IPA notice doesn't display in a new TR but creates another column of this own, obviously because its opening "|-" is swallowed as the content of the previous cell and not interpreted properly. Apparently this has been going for weeks. The template is such a mess I have no way of fixing it. WTF can't you people KISS this bloody thing?!? --Malyctenar 17:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree completely. However, the task of fixing this is a little beyond my abilities. --Andrew c 18:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There's a small part of me that would love to see the language box display ten basic translations in the language or something, maybe the numbers 1-3, hello, goodbye, I love you, thank you and things along that line. A pipe dream, most likely, but you must admit it would be interesting. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 13:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The translations are not really a good idea because they would just become revert war fodder. Besides which, they are oftentimes already in some of the other wiki sites. -Yupik 22:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISO 2 codes in the infobox

I just came across this edit. I know that it seems rather insignificant, but I believe that it is impossible for any language not to have an ISO 639-2 code (unlike ISO 639-1 which is confined to major languages so there can be 'none', and ISO 639-3 which, although extensive, is so specific that there are gaps so that, rather than 'none', the entry '—' may be appropriate). When I first set it up, the column for ISO 639-2 codes was given the default text 'to be added', because I wanted it to flag up the fact that someone has yet to look it up, rather than no code being appropriate. I would challenge anyone to find a language for which an ISO 639-2 code cannot be given (the code might not be very focused but it will fit). — Gareth Hughes 19:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right. At the very least any language could be called mis for "Miscellaneous languages". —Angr 19:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
OK, this now looks petty, and appears to have shades of an insult. — Gareth Hughes 20:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't call anyone arrogant, I call the notion of an all-encompassing ISO 639-2 code range with respect to individual languages arrogant, although I can understand that some might settle with a collective code, in which case the existence of 'mis' is sufficient to settle the issue. However, I think something like 'to be added' is misleading if it only leads to a language being classified under a collective code; in fact, I would like to see the infobox make it clear when such a code is used. -- Dissident (Talk) 21:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template doco location

The usage doco for this template is (non-intuitively) presently at template talk:Infobox Language/Usage, also on a few other subpages. Any objections if these were to be consolidated and transcluded onto the main template page itself, via the WP:DOC method?--cjllw | TALK 07:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No objection here: it's very weird to have it where it is. --Yksin 01:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New design

Allow me to be the first to say that I don't like the new design. But maybe it's just because I'm used to the old one. --Ptcamn 13:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I allow you :-). I don't mind being reverted (just please, in that case, undo only the first revision of mine, I (think I) made a few more useful changes). Personally, I think the old design was too... oldish, and the font too big; I applied design elements from {{Infobox Ethnic group}}. Just, I'd like to hear a couple of other opinions; WP:BRD. Duja► 13:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I personally like it. It looks more in line with many other infoboxes now, and more modern. If only someone would do this to the taxobox. Good work! Max Naylor 14:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I hadn't even noticed it until I saw this comment. But I like it too; it's considerably more compact and more legible. —Angr 16:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
nice new infobox --Andersmusician $ 15:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Français or français?

Please take a look at the infobox for Occitan. Should the native name of the language be capitalised? If so, to what extent?

I have already suggested (Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style) that, this being a datum in a box, we should show what the Occitans do & leave their name uncapitalised. Rothorpe 13:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The case for capitalization is twofold:
  • it is functioning as a title, and titles are, I believe, still capitalized in Occitan, as in English.
  • Occitan, as the English word for the language, is capitalized anyway.
Whether these are enough together is another question. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it should be capitalized just as being the first word in a table cell. The words "spoken" and "total" aren't normally capitalized in English either, but they are in the infobox because they start a cell. —Angr 06:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
OK, then, I've capitalised as in the text. Rothorpe 15:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] colspan="3"?

I wanted to edit the layout of the table sligtly because of a problem in an article, but at the start of the template I'm greeted with a 'colspan="3"'... WTF? Is there a special reason this table has got three columns instead of two? I'm not really prepared to hack in this template if I have no clue why this is. Also perhaps this template should have a preview sample to aid editing. Shinobu (talk) 13:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Created languages like Esperanto have an optional third column for the date that the language was created. --CBD 02:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flags

I noticed in the infobox on German language we have a whole collection of national and municipal flags. As they do not seem to add anything to the article I would propose to remove them. Does anyone have any objections? --John (talk) 21:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Setting doesn't work

I tried to add "setting=Liturgical language" to the infobox at Church Slavonic language, but if there is any content in that field, the template won't display correctly. — —Michael Z. 2008-04-06 06:07 Z 06:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ISO code for old languages

I propose to add a new field to specify the ISO language code for the historic versions of the language, e.g. 'osp' is ISO 639-3 code for "Old Spanish" (the Spanish spoken some centuries ago), or 'ang' for Old English. See for example all code starting by "Old " in [1]. Opinions? —surueña 13:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Those should just be in the articles for the "old" language in question. So Old English language has an infobox showing its code as "ang", and Old Spanish language has an infobox showing its code as "osp". There's no reason for the infobox at Spanish language to show "osp". —Angr 20:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Sure there's a reason. Old Spanish is a kind of Spanish. This is just the kind of reference information I'd like to see at a glance, rather than searching the article text and hoping that I found all of the relevant articles to check. Likewise, French fr/fre/fra < Middle French frm < Old French fro, en < enm < ang, etc. —Michael Z. 2008-05-08 22:07 z
I agree with both of you. However, although ideally all languages should have a specific article describing the historic variant studied by scholars from old texts (and then that specific code should be specified in that article), in practice only a few languages have it. So probably instead of a new field, maybe a new section named "historic variants" linking to those variants, and giving the language code. I think this would also encourage editors to create a new article about old variants. PS: Angr, does your nick have anything to do with the Old English lang code? :-) Cheers —surueña 07:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

How about something like this? I would only list direct ancestors (older versions), and not all of the influencing languages. —Michael Z. 2008-05-09 08:22 z

Language family: Indo-European (ine)
                  Germanic (gem)
                   West Germanic
                    Anglo-Frisian
                     Anglic
                      English
Ancestors:       Middle English (enm)
                 Old English (ang)
Writing system:  Latin (English variant, Latn)
Looks like a good approach to me (but I'm not a language expert at all). I suppose new parameters are needed to specify the language code for the family and ancestors, e.g. anc1iso, fam1iso, anc2iso, fam2iso... In my opinion it's more difficult to add the script code (you can't insert the language code in existing parenthesis), and anyway articles for each writing system are far more common. But I support the rest of your proposal. Cheers —surueña 13:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)