User talk:Whaleyland/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 4 |
Archive 5
| Archive 6 →


Contents

Revert of Template:S-hou

Hiya - could you please explain to me why you reverted my edits to the template S-hou? Cheers - DBDR 10:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean any offense by it, but whatever you did, it changed the entire layout of s-hou on many pages and I had to revert it. It seems whatever you changed was readopted by others into the template in a way that didn't change the viewing format. I should have left a post on your page, sorry.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 18:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Please could you remove the words "Cadet branch of the" which currently appears in the succession boxes that use template:s-hou? e.g. Ahaz. - Fayenatic london (talk) 09:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Why remove the cadet branch option? Many royal houses are cadet branches. You are not required to write anything in for cadet branch and it will not show up with that option if you don't write anything. It comes up as the sixth option on template:s-hou. Regarding the kings and tribes of Israel and Judah, I put them there to attribute the various families to houses. I don't know of any other way to word it but cadet branch, but if you don't like it, you can remove it from the s-hou. I won't stop you
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 01:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I get it now, thanks. May I suggest three things that would add clarification:
  1. Document the sixth parameter at Template:S-start#S-hou, where it is currently not mentioned;
  2. Add or link to documentation somehow on the page Template:S-hou
  3. In the finished product, put double brackets around Cadet branch so that people can find out what it means. When I first read it I thought it was vandalism.
HTH! - Fayenatic london (talk) 07:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Followed by:

Hi, on some Television series people have created succession templates that use "Preceded by" "Followed by" instead of "Succeeded by". I'd like to remove all these showspecific templates, and use one generalized one and in that process i came across the new type of succession boxes. Do you think it's wise to expand your effort into these kinds of things?

For instance I want to change the contents of Template:AD navigation, with

{{s-start}}
{{s-bef|before="{{{1}}}"}}
{{s-ttl|title=[[List of American Dad! episodes|''American Dad!'' episodes]]}}
{{s-aft|after="{{{2}}}"}}
{{end}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Television show navigational boxes|{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Succession templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]</noinclude>

but "Succeeded by" doesn't really sound correct in the context. It's not a very common practise, since most pages use {{Infobox Television episode}} navigation, but I would like to know what you think about this. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 08:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. I am a little swamped with non-Wikipedia projects right now, but I will check out the internals of the TV templates and see if I can rework them to fit the succession box standards. It may not work, though, if you want to change the wording around. That is a little more set in stone. I'll get back to you after I tinker with it some.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 20:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Using "unknown" in succession templates

Using "Unknown" in succession boxes is making those articles link to the disambiguation page Unknown. I'm not sure if you knew about this. --SueHay 21:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for some random insignificant page called "Template:S-start/doc"

I've already posted a link in the Succession blah blah project talk page (I've also proposed WP:SBS as a shortcut there; the project's name is too darn long!) but I guess I'm too impatient to wait some days before I get feedback. I don't know how often that talk page is visited either, so...

Well, here's the link. By the way, I see I'm not the only one with illusions of grandeur. You should check my userpage. ;) Waltham 17:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

When one starts a conversation, one should be willing to pursue it further as well. You seem to have neglected this; would you prefer to continue it in your talk page? Waltham, The Duke of 11:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:S-ptd

Template:S-ptd has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Waltham, The Duke of 13:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

PS: Following due course, eh? Waltham, The Duke of

Hello? Anybody here?

Wakey, wakey, Mr Whaley! If I were to make a guess, I would have to say that your girlfriend has finally managed to achieve her goal of ungluing you from your computer. Understandable the fact that you are entitled to a personal life may be, I am afraid your presence is nevertheless crucial to this project from the very state of things (namely, the lack of contributors). As you see, I am not too pressing; I have given you ten days to answer. I cannot wait for ever, and I have exams coming up. Please answer the questions submitted in my talk page. Waltham, The Duke of 18:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC) PS: I see that s-ptd has finally been deleted. At last! The decision was unanimous.

Gershon Galil's succession dates

Hi, I notice that it was you who added the succession dates to the Kings of Judah. The Galil series doesn't seem to make sense, as there are so many overlaps. Please see Talk:Gershon_Galil#Chronology of the kings and reply. If you're busy and need time to look into it, please let me know so that I'll wait rather than go deleting anything unnecessarily. Fayenatic london (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for replying quickly. I'll try WikiProject Judaism for help if needed. Fayenatic london (talk) 22:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: S-hno and S-ttl

Template:S-hno has been unlocked. Template:S-ttl has not been updated because I need clarification of "added at the bottom of the "with" parameter." If you could just copy the source code and update it, I'd be happy to copy it back into the template. Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

To what are you refering

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:S-hou&diff=next&oldid=137703030

  • You removed a very nice change that enables a reader to see where he is as these are placed so far down on a page. Why? To what standard guideline does your summary refer? // FrankB 17:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It was agreed by WP:SBS that while the option of adding an individual's name to the succession box may be a helpful addition, the debates and conflicts over proper titles and names may overwhelm the convenience of it. Many people who have succession boxes were rarely called by the name that their page is named. Also, many had multiple titles, while the page only lists one. For example, Henry IV of France also held the regnal title King of Navarre as a part of his official title, but that portion of his name is not on the title's header. Overall, it simply seems that the name of the page does not consistantly match the true name of the individual enough to allow this option currently. I loved the idea and I wish it could work but I don't see how it can right now.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 18:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

A) With an option of defining "|name=" one can list ALL the titles of a personage, for example, a list separated by HTML line breaks (br), or the "HISTORIC Handle" which seems most appropriate.
B) The concept of having an override for {PAGENAME} came about for that very reason, so your "logic" strikes me as somewhat flawed.
C) The best default is to the page name of the article MOST OF THE TIME, as that is the name the people having a handle on the history of the person think best (with a due nod to naming conventions, natch).
D) Your WT:SBS page holds zero discussion on the matter, so I'm afraid I need some convincing on whether your project mates agree with you.
E) While I can conceive (with a strain) that someone may under some weird and unusual circumstance want to have NO Title, that can be accomplished by defining name=&nbsp;—which I believe I'd documented when annotating the /doc page. If not, my bad, but if that unusual circumstance is a governing parametric, there are other ways to logically disable the default {PAGENAME} without breaking it in most pages where it is, you agree beneficial. This snippet would do it:

{{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{{name}}}|{{#if:{{{inhibit|}}}|<!--do nothing-->|{{PAGENAME}} }} }}, for example.

Alternatively (requiring wasteful edits imho, is to just provide the name= without the default to the pagename. But I think that's much less effective. (And certainly "fights" uniformity.)
At the least, I think the matter ought to be given a complete discussion. Pretty odd to have you praising it one day, and then reverting the edit out a few days later. What's the rush??? // FrankB 00:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

On your last

  • Think that's a good idea... but glad to hear you put it back.
  • On the lines between rows... I usually try to add them, which alas is no help to you! <G> However, your system of templates will either have to redefine Template:S-start (edit talk links history) (contents:{| class="wikitable" style="margin:0.5em auto; font-size:95%;{{#if:{{{noclear|}}}||clear:both;}}" to use another class, or override the parameter in the common.css page that sets those up using a style= add on. The last alternative would be to add the override to the local subtemplate same as you would, for example, colspan=5 or such.
  • You can add a style command after a class with generally no problems, but then your change is really global, unless given as an option.
  • If I were you, I'd make damn sure I had some of those folks on the team, as otherwise you're playing with Russian revert roulette. AFAIK, these were considered very stable and "Done" after an overhaul about a year ago. Even colors were debated, so tread carefully! Have you announced your WP:SSB project on the pump? 'Ware sleeping bears! Good luck! // FrankB 08:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:SBS overhaul

WP:SBS is getting a major overhaul with its layout. User:The Duke of Waltham is leading that charge and most of the edits and discussions have migrated to subpages of his such as User_talk:The Duke of Waltham/SBS. His talk page is where the two of us have been working out the remaining bugs in the s- box series. As soon as the guidelines page is updated, he plans to send a release to a number of the related WikiProjects, the project members, and a few of the forums, but the guidelines page still needs some work and many of the members of have been contributing to it from what I understand.
Regarding changing templates, we are actually just fixing some of the internals in a few of them and syncing the non s- boxes to the style where possible. Regarding titles, I am aware that many of them have had discussions and thus most of my title merges that I have completed use one of the previous colors. Quite frankly, though, so many people are creating titles these days that The Duke and I have agreed then need to shrink down to a few less. If you want to see why, see how many there are at User:KuatofKDY/Cleanup List. Many of those title templates at the bottom of the page could fall under a few categories.
Thanks for the work and please give feedback. I liked your need addition so much after that helpful switch.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 17:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


Okay, I'll probably look in somewhen in the next few days. One philosphical perspective though based on 30+ years of coding this and that: Much effort here on Wikipedia goes into redoing things others have spent much effort doing. This is not infrequently deliterious, not only because it violates the common sensical sentiment of the old saw: "If it's not broken, don't fix it!"—but more importantly because it causes others extra work and their precious time if a tool (i.e. a subtemplate giving a certain outcome) is suddenly different, or worse, missing!
Consequently, many younger editors here confuse activity with progress and don't appreciate the multipler effect of how they steal time from others used to an old way and tool template. I would caution you all that if you are combining and definitely if you are contemplating eliminating templates that unless your changes do not require adding a parameter to duplicate behaviors and effects, that having a specialty function and the extra name is a really cheap way to get a desired outcome. It's burden on the future is minimal, whereas overcomplicating things by combining much into more capable units almost always makes them harder to use.

Thus you all might want to take a hard look at writing up 'documentation' of what is currently in play first and foremost, before haring off on wide spread changes. OTOH, some complexity can be a good tool as well, see for the guts and relationships between examples like  : ltscms , ltswpd, ltsmta, wpd-catlist-up, cms-catlist-up, catlst, and catlist and so forth. If some of the names you want to 'mostly eliminate' as something rarely needed, such techniques can be used as a front end to simplify the calling of a more complex kernal template, that is probably a good thing. OTOH, the more a template is used on articles, the more protection issues become important, as one vandal can mess up a lot of pages--so a variety of ways of doing the same thing also has benefits of being more anti-vandalistic, so to speak.

Where is there a clear statement of the problems you all percieve and goals that you are trying to achieve. That is to say, the motives behind this effort--t'would be helpful to see what triggered the activities! Heck, need such to recruit help and convince others, so perhaps you can convince me. I'm fairly active in cohercing successsion templates to display what I want in historical articles, so you might say I've some vested interest! <G> Cheers! //FrankB 18:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Looking at the current James I of England per your prior note, I'm a lot concerned you're all making the boxes much too narrow. For clarity, I'm of the opinion that pipetricking names compliant with the naming conventions for articles is generally a bad idea... especially as using a "friendly nickname" is culturally dependent, and so less is usually a detriment to understanding what is going on, and who is related how to what office and so forth. This of course is much worse for those looking on from other language wiki's who almost universally model and translate our basic articles and so forth. Hence, and aliased link adds to their confusion. (I work a lot on Meta and the Commons, so interlingual issues are matters of import on a daily basis!) Anyway, unless you all are going to float these right or left, the narrower format is striking me as trouble in the making and will make for many an ugly display on pages using full pagenames or even long aliased nickname titles.

Note I am saying that narrowness is likely already causing a fair amount of article ugliness! OTOH, there is no reason one can't add a narrow OPTION, for pages under the Tender Loving Care of an editor actively working it. See for example Template:Template category (edit talk links history) and the whatlinkshere list of Template:Interwikicat-grp (edit talk links history) where both are used in concert. Note that option takes the template from being centered and wide to tall and narrow with a shift left to make room for the second... all to present better together when applicable. That technique would be viable as it doesn't necessitate fixing a whole bunch of pages in some batch process of marathon editting, but instead makes it an individual editorial decision that can be applied on a case by case basis. Your Template:S-start (edit talk links history) will lead, and all else should then follow. Best regards! // FrankB 18:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Guidelines and s-start

re: Guidelines and s-start


I actually agree with you completely. When the succession box problem was first presented to me, I just wanted to replace the ugly "3D" looking HTML succession boxes with something easier to use and more compliant. I found Template:succession box and used the internals of that to derive the current formula. However, the popularity of it was unknown to me for many months until I got back to editing and realized that many people had begun to add headers and other options. At that point in time, I grabbed all those editors and created WP:SBS to create some rules for editing. Let's just say it ended up being a fighting war where we made some decisions but everyone was still doing their own things. The project went quiet for a while and the page went into disuse.

User:The Duke of Waltham contacted me a few months ago stating his desire to sum up all our discussions, decisions, proposals, etc, and make a guidelines page and act, basically, as the publicity manager for the project. Up until now, we have had no guidelines for making succession boxes and this was resulting in problems across Wikipedia of differently styled templates being used, dating inconsistencies, name inconsistencies, and more recently an explosion of titles, many of which could be better catagorized. That is why the project is at the point it is at now. The guidelines page is almost done and many of the members have contributed their input, and most agree. Some decisions have also been made due to an overwhelming popularity of some features, such as full dates in succession boxes instead of just years. We had originally discouraged that.

Regarding Template:s-start, the mother of so much now on wikipedia, I agree with you completely that it should sit fat and pretty at the bottom of each page and not seem so...narrow. However, my knowledge of code is strangely little. I am less a genius and more of a good copycat who knows what he is looking for when he is looking on codes. Sadly, though, it has escaped me completely on how to make the s-start fat and plumb instead of thin and narrow. So I would like you to help me. Here is the code for the page:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:0.5em auto; font-size:95%;{{#if:{{{noclear|}}}||clear:both;}}"

Can you recreate that code in a way that would make it short and fat. If you want to include the option of narrow, please include that. However, I need to be certain that entering the code {{start}} will produce the correct thing and not error because it needs a pipe or something. I will propose the change myself and even test it if you wish. I have a number of test areas on my own user page that I run all my templates through before posting them.

Thank you for all the help! I want these templates to be perfect.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 20:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

  • No problemo--and you're quite welcome. All you need is to add a width=xx% (and or perhaps "margin:auto;") statement within the style= quotes (Don't forget a terminating semi-colons!).

    I'd suggest using width:{{{infoboxmargin|88%}}}; as the desired change within the existing {{s-start}} style= lines quotes. I use infoboxmargin advisedly, as it's use as an option parameter in various infoboxes is becoming common, and that gives a common term for folks to recall when they want the feature. Alternatively, you can even use two parameter names (or three or ten!) to do the same task. [The parenthesis needed will get a bit dense though! <g>]

    "width:{{{width|default}}};" would work equally well (one's an operator, the other a parameter, which is to say a variable), but we had some "issues" in infoboxes where image width (sizing) options and infoboxes overall width were colliding when changed using the same "width:{{{width|default}}}" parameter in effect, causing some unwanted minor side-effects! <G>

    Bottom line, you can call it "glops" so long as it's after the "width:" AND before the semi-colon.

    FYI--The three curly braces in this form make up wikimarkups first if-then-else capability (now augmented tremendously by parserfunctions), in case you don't recognize the syntax. If "infoboxwidth" is undefined, then the value after the pipe is used as the default. Simple. Some stuff I've written uses that nested about five deep... (e.g. {{{A|{{{B|{{{C|...}}}}}}}}} and so forth!) which gives a capability of precedence arbitration, the most important (one which will override the others) being placed left most.
  • Just as an option, you could define the capability to float left or right and if so, automatically alter the default width to 60-65% if desired. My "Suspicion" is page layout on a fair number of minor nobles would benefit from letting the succession box float up beside the list of dead heirs, so to speak! <g> The code for that I'd suggest would be to use a switch on parameter '1', AND have any specified 'infoboxmargin' override the "automatic" default, while the left right overrides the center floating position. If interested, I can probably do that up real quick. (See for example, some of the code in Template:Left60 (edit talk links history) or {{left66}} and steal techniques! Template:FixHTML (edit talk links history) uses a switch similar to what I'm thinking! That's very similar in both 'intent' and 'use' to S-start by the way!) Good luck, and keep up the enthusiasm! // FrankB 21:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

re: this! -- I'd beat you too it... which was a good thing else we'd have had an edit conflict! <BSEG> // FrankB 21:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

s-gov broken

Hi there, your merging of some of the s- template series into s-gov seems like an interesting idea, but it isn't working: {{s-gov}} without parameters produces no heading.

I am also concerned that the some of items conflated in there are inappropriate: the "par" option, for example, as in {{s-gov|par}} makes no sense: Political party positions are not (except in some one-party states) government positions, and should not be derived from s-gov. Similarly, Legal appointments are not necessarily government derived, and {{s-gov|leg}} ... so I am reversing these mergers to allow restoration of a working version of {{s-gov}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

PS I have also protected the templates against further non-admin edits. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I checked with all the legal positions on the list and they all ARE governmental and so I am changing that template into a government-only template in the continuing effort to consolidate title templates due to the fact they have gone way out of hand in management. I will concede to political party positions and find a new home for that template or perhaps keep it as is. However, I am proposing for a bot to turn all instances of {{s-gov}} into {{s-gov|}} because adding that pipe will make all the templates work. At that point in time, I wish for s-gov to be restored to how I had made it (minus the political party option) so that it can cover more title options. I hope that works for you. Regardless, thank you for testing the template and pointing out its flaw. I am trying to test them all when I change their internals, but sometimes I miss one.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 05:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. First thing is that I have asked at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#s-gov_replacement that your proposed change not be implemented, because a template should not require an empty parameter in order to work. If there is a consensus for the merger (and I don't see such a consenus), then the s-gov template should be set up so that it still works without a template. Because of the number of pages which use these templates, the testing of templates such as this should not be done on the live template, but on a copy, partly to avoid errors affecting the pages where the template is used, but also to avoid the high server load involved in rolling out changes in the template to the cached versions of hundreds of pages.
Second thing is that a merger such as this should not be done without prior consensus; I;m sure that you were acting in good faith in accordance with WP:BOLD, but when a high-use template is involved it's best to discuss the changes first. I suggest that this discussion take place at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Succession_Box_Standardization#s-gov_broken.
Finally, I'm sorry if my rather rushed messages last night didn't thank you for the attention you are paying to the proliferation of succession box templates; I fear that what I wrote may have come across as rather negative, and that my assumption of good faith may not have been as evident as it should have been. I don't simply want to be a naysayer, but I would like to ensure that changes such as these have consensus before they happen. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl, it is unfortunate that I must say this, but almost all the title templates in the s- box series have an empty parameter. I tried quite a while ago to fix that problem but it was to no avail. The problem arises from the fact that almost all the title templates have multiple parameters. An excellent example of this is Template:s-par. Basically the situation with the empty parameter can be resolved by actually choosing a parameter from the list. In the case of Template:s-gov (before it was reverted), an empty parameter results in the original title: Government offices. It was agreed between User:The Duke of Waltham and me that this template implied "appointed" governmental offices as opposed to "elected" (s-par and s-off), "inherited" (s-roy), or "granted" (s-reg. s-her). Following that mindset, I merged together Template:s-court, Template:s-legal, Template:s-mil, Template:s-dip, or Template:s-lead to form one template. You were correct about Template:s-ppo (political parties) not really falling under the same parameters and I concede that needs a separate template currently and have moved it back into the Finalized Titles list on User:KuatofKDY/Cleanup List (a tracking page I made to work with the various templates in the series).
Now the main problem you have with merging these templates is the fact that Template:s-gov will require a pipe now to work. However this is already the standard in virtually all other title pages, without my intervention. It was my design to actually require ALL the title templates to be changed to this format in order to keep consistency AND promote the use of more specific titles in succession boxes as opposed to the usual generic titles (that derive from the empty parameters. I am fully willing to work with a bot to replace all the templates with the pipe version, but ultimately I am trying for a consolidation of title templates (as the list shows, there are a lot, many repetitive or unneccessary) and consistency across the series. I will repost this in WT:SBS to see if anyone else is active currently in the talk forum, but I believe most of them will agree with me, especially since so many templates already require empty parameters.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 16:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Whaleyland, I have no probs with {{s-par}} not working without a parameter, because it is meaningless without a parameter ... but it's not a good situation for s-gov, which is widely used without a parameter. Anyway, let's discuss it at WT:SBS. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Succession Box Series Problem

re: Question from here!

Frank, do you know of any way to make something like Template:s-par work so that when you type {{s-par}} the template works? One of the admins is going crazy because she hates the requirement to add a pipe at the end of templates if the template has a switch parameter. She keeps reverting edits and protecting pages and even reverting entire succession box series that I have edited simply because it requires an empty parameter. Please help!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 17:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

SAY WHAT

RE: Template:S-par (edit talk links history) && from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Stuart_Mill&action=edit

  • You must think I want to work for a living!

(<g>)

test 1

stolen actual use
Academic offices
Preceded by
William Stirling of Keir		 Rector of the University of St Andrews
1865 - 1868		 Succeeded by
James Anthony Froude
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Preceded by
Sir George de Lacy Evans		 Member of Parliament for Westminster
1865–1868		 Succeeded by
William Henry Smith

test 2

  • Test {{s-par}}
Academic offices
Preceded by
William Stirling of Keir		 Rector of the University of St Andrews
1865 - 1868		 Succeeded by
James Anthony Froude
Assembly seats
Preceded by
Sir George de Lacy Evans		 Member of Parliament for Westminster
1865–1868		 Succeeded by
William Henry Smith

test 3

  • Test {{s-par|test=testline|}}
Academic offices
Preceded by
William Stirling of Keir		 Rector of the University of St Andrews
1865 - 1868		 Succeeded by
James Anthony Froude
Assembly seats
Preceded by
Sir George de Lacy Evans		 Member of Parliament for Westminster
1865–1868		 Succeeded by
William Henry Smith

test 4

  • Test {{s-par|glops}}
Academic offices
Preceded by
William Stirling of Keir		 Rector of the University of St Andrews
1865 - 1868		 Succeeded by
James Anthony Froude
Assembly seats
Preceded by
Sir George de Lacy Evans		 Member of Parliament for Westminster
1865–1868		 Succeeded by
William Henry Smith

My suggestions

1) From looking at the template, looks like you just need to define a default behavior in the switch.

2) From the history, I see no evidence of any sort of revert as you imply. However, the code within around and about the parameter 'test' suggests that you need to refer this to either CBDunkerson or David Kernow, if my suggestion doesn't get you home. That's a double suggestion if you are indeed in a pissing contest with an admin, and I see BrownHairGirl has protected the template, and they've the tools and clout to argue with her if necessary.

3) Suggest |#default={{{1|Office}}} , which would allow one to specify the office directly as '{1}', or displays "Office" (a sort of subtle error message saying give me more information). Even should one forget to specify it, inside the article context, would make sense to the stray reader-customer.

The other alternative (and I'm not sure I understand your "DESIRED OUTPUT", since is just the collapsed "Non-header bar" as it were in the version I'm currently displaying) would be to move {{S-par}} to {{{{S-par1}}, where in the senario, s-par then tests for '{1}' and if not given, passes the pipe you desire... again, for reasons inobvious to me in these tests. I see no benefit to that, an empty parameter is an empty parameter, and the parser will treat an empty pipe same as none given, so far as I know. Perhaps you have an error in assumptions?

    • Belated Clarification--The newly created redirect 's-par' would be re-written as a front end template for the old 's-par' just moved to 's-par1' with appropriate passalong of parameters. Such works, but don't see the use of the empty pipe per your senario as I understood it.


Since I can't see the effect you are trying for, that's the best I can do for now. Hope that helps. // FrankB 18:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear. By choosing s-par, Whaley has selected the one template which doesn't actually need a default text: it's not supposed to be used without a parameter, and if it were to have a deafult, the default sould probably be along the lines of "oi! which parliament did you mean?" :)
The problem has arisen with templates which have a widely-used default text, where whaley tried to add extra options, causing the templates to break as currently used :( It would be helpful to have a technical solution to the problem though that s-par doesn't need it, and we still need wider consideration of whether it's really a good idea to merge all these templates even if the technical problems are resolved. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I've cautioned against that myself above Brownhairedgal, as you can see above.

KDY, on your last, let me yell for the cavalry, but asking for help generally means you're going to let things stand alone without pissing in them for a day or so. Note my many sandboxes from tmp...tmp7, temp, temp5, etc. So just move over when you want an assist and let the page stay as at the time you ask for an assist! I could have done w/o the editg conflict!. NBD, but only polite. My first thought got nowhere fast, so I'll see if one of my tutors are around, so bide. I'll get back to you. // FrankB 00:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. on leaving, a thought- what about a template similar to the list processing in  : template list , catlist, and see also where a single cell just takes all the data for the family's kids so to speak... that can be done within the current cell easily, so no lines get generated. Like this (but with if statements

A
B
C
D died 932483 Born adklfj Note: Lead revolution against drinking wine so Hops crop would make more money.
E
F
...and so forth. Where each is a number suffixed parameter based on your current User:KuatofKDY/s-kid (edit talk links history) prototype. Harump! User:KuatofKDY/Template:s-kid (edit talk links history)

How would that work for you? // FrankB 00:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Is User:KuatofKDY/Sandbox evolved and looking per your desires? CBD made a change to your s-kid which was along the lines I was aiming for. Sometimes knowing who to ask is better than knowing what to do yourself! Cheers. // FrankB 01:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, what I wanted was exactly what that user did. It all looks good now. All I have to do is clean up the entire thing and make it work right...especially the parentheses. I hate those things but they are sometimes so necessary. I moved the official project to its real template pages (that I made some time ago): Template:s-mar and Template:s-chi. The s-iss tempalate is still on my page for now until I decided what the real page name should be. s-iss for some reason does really read "issue" to me. I also implemented your name switch from s-hou into s-fam for the first field. It works really nice, I must add. Thanks for the help. I will keep you in mind if any further updates are needed or help is warranted. Cheers!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 06:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Family information and ancestry box

Hi!

re: Due to a request by User:The Duke of Waltham, it was suggested I make my family-related templates into a collapsible template. What I cam up with is this: ...

... snip, snip

It has some other problems, mostly related to optional parameters that are not working entirely with the s-chi and s-mar templates, but if you can help fix the first problem, that is really what I am looking for. Thanks Fab artus. You're awesome!

  1. In case you haven't figured it, I'm very wikimissing these days... (GREAT LOOKING template btw! Kudos... Good Job!!) ... considering the time lag here, I figured I better get an update of needs from you.
  2. The lines can be put back by examining the edit CBD did for you and reversing same. I believe he made the border statement: "border:none;", iirc, so substitute "solid", or "groove" for "none". See HTML element and my reference page (where I hide things and techniques I may want to copy someday) here and steal to your hearts content.
  3. Edit links are easy, there are several templates which put up different display modes, and I don't have a handle on any save Template:Edit (edit talk links history) as I usually just do an inline adaptation of Template:Lts (edit talk links history). Just steal the parts one wants at need. (contrast with Template:Las (edit talk links history)!!!)
  4. The better resource for the kind of templates and the technology in them as you are doing is David. If it can wait, and IFF I'm around, I'm glad to help, but I'm really mostly wikimissing as have tons of summer projects around the property this year.
  5. I'm off to grab my chainsaws and do some now, but please redirect my name to FrankB or so, I'm having regrets my name has become web searchable (note the interjected space above) and someone may have to be changing any references that are google searchable soon... so I'd appreciate it and would be best to sidestep the issue. Thanks.
  6. If you still need me to check out the sub-templates you mentioned, or otherwise look back at stuff, leave me a specific list of "desires" and gripes, and in seven or eight hours or so, I'll check for wikimessages and have time too. Best regards (Awesome, huh? Thanks!) // FrankB 18:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You have stopped coming...

For the love of the Unicorn, we are this close to posting the guidelines page, can you please answer more regularly to the messages in my talk page? I am growing very impatient, and I shan't be very accessible in the following days because I am re-reading the Harry Potter series (something which I would have started much earlier but I had to study for my driving examinations; I might even be unable to start reading Deathly Hallows when I buy it because I will still be reading Goblet of Fire!).

Speaking of Harry Potter, I have noticed in your Contributions page that you have added a couple of succession boxes in Potter-related articles, and I marvelled at the fact that I have failed to connect my two biggest concerns for this period (SBS and HP). In any case, I spent some time yesterday and I believe we have a nice set of boxes now—it is a nice feeling to know that the articles are getting ready for the tidal wave of information that will arrive on Saturday. In any case, I believe the Academic offices header looks very good in those articles; I love their golden colour (we certainly shouldn't change that one when we start addressing the concerns at WT:SBS). Waltham, The Duke of 10:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

  • PING answer!!!... with a chuckle... he's off to do what I've been spending a lot of my MIA time doing! Going to any midnight book parties Friday? <G> Cheers! // FrankB 20:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh yes, I forgot to message you back and say nevermind...um...nevermind. Thanks for the help, though. I ultimately found that I know more than I thought.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 21:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
No Problemo. Some of us call that "Progress"! Enjoy it... makes up for the days one backslides or gets nowhere fast! (Kind of like Hermione's "or worse—expelled" line!)
My oldest tells me an illicit copy of The Deathly Hallows made it onto the web for a while today. Dang! I miss all the fun! // FrankB 22:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Nah, who cares, everyone's got the real thing by now.
I meant to say, the original novel has now properly been released into the market. And I have bought a copy, and I have read it, and I have loved it. Anyone else who has? Waltham, The Duke of 10:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Hem hem, Darius... Listen, I will completely understand it if you cannot keep checking my talk page for responses, and I will be glad to move the conversation to your talk page in this case. But, since such a thing has not happened (yet), it should be much better if you dropped by more often. If nothing else, I am trying to keep an open communication channel here.

Anyway, I believe we ought to have a well-tended main page for the project, and I need your input in order to make sure it is in order. After that, I may launch the advertisement campaign (although there are reasons why we may want to delay it, or at least some parts of it, until September, namely the fact that a lot of people are on holiday, or just having a Wikibreak—I would suggest that we should send the membership renewal messages for the time being and start working on ideas for an ad). Waltham, The Duke of 08:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:S-fic

Template:S-fic has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Please don't wrap the TfD template in a <noinclude> tag. Yes, I realize it affects the visual presentation of the template, but that's kind of the point; if people didn't know a template was up for deletion, it could just up and disappear unnecessarily. It's a pretty fair process, and helps bring some attention to something that, otherwise, barely anyone would notice. I have changed it from {{tfd-inline}} to {{tfd}}, however, to help make it break the template less. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Succession boxes...

...even with a "new header stating fictional status" are still succession boxes. It's not a matter of identifying the characters/positions as fictional, but rather with the fact that all fiction is, basically, present tense. Please read WP:WAF for a more in-depth explanation. The long and the short of it, though, is that succession boxes, regardless of their headers, are inappropriate.

That said, take a look at the Template:Enterprise captains template I created. Rather than indicating former, current, next, etc., it's simply a list of characters who at various points hold the job. You might consider creating a similar template that removes references to sequence, and simply lists characters who hold the job. --EEMeltonIV 04:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:SBS failure to communicate

Hello, Please do not change F1-related boxes without discussing with the WPF1.

See here for the discussion at WP:SBS, and also here for the discussion at WPF1.

The action has raised question by me regarding the authority of the WP:SBS. Read more at the link here

Feel free to discuss with me regarding this.

Regards, Guroadrunner 02:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:S-spo

I don't get the speedy request? Templates by nature aren't meant to have context. Carlossuarez46 00:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, grounds of speedy on templates are much tighter (perhaps rightly so), if they're all related, do a group nom at WP:TFD that'll make them all go together. Technically, I can't delete this on speedy grounds. I won't untag your others because while I sympathesize with you, another admin may go further and actually delete (don't count on it). Carlossuarez46 01:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Template talk:S-lead

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Template talk:S-lead, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Template talk:S-lead is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Template talk:S-lead, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Peerages

I notice that you have reverted my reverts of your edits. The Duke of Hamilton and Brandon, holds one of his Dukedoms in the Peerage of Scotland the other in the Peerage of Great Britain, your edits are therefore wrong. You have also removed a graphic from the succession box which is in common to all other Dukes of Hamilton. Why is this? It is a common thing to include an armorial in highly senior European Houses boxes, of which the Hamiltons are as senior as you can get in Scotland, the oldest extant country in Europe. Brendandh 02:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The Peerages of Scotland, Ireland and England were not merged and are still extant, they were augmented by the creations of the Peerage of Great Britain and latterly the Peerage of the United Kingdom. Furthermore the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon, in common with other holders of multiple Duchies, such as the Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry, or the Duke of Richmond, Gordon and Lennox, should always be referred to as their rank dictates. The title of Duke is only inferior to the reigning monarch, and should be styled as such, either in the article title, or the first line, or both. The complication insofar as boxes are concerned, appears to be when such a person as indeed all of these Dukes, with the exception of Buccleuch, holds Dukedoms from the different Peerages within these Islands. Brendandh 08:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You terrible man! you have just completely bunged up my watchlist! :) Ok images aside, well done on having the patience to fiddle with all of those boxes. Brendandh 20:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

S-sport and S-gaa

When you intend to finish this move? (Gnevin 10:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Hi sorry if i seems a little rude last time , would if possible for you to use #b0c4de as the colour for the template, its the standard WP:GAA colour, thanks (Gnevin 19:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Re: Mongasque princes

Hi Whaleyland, thanks for leaving a message on my page about this. To be honest, I am not quite sure what exactly you are referring to regarding reverting someone's attempt to format a Monegasque succession box. My main edits to the Monegasque succession box were the removal of lower noble titles held by the Prince of Monaco until their status could be clarified. See the talk page for Albert II regarding that matter. Looking at my edit difference, my only change was the aforementioned removal. I have not changed the headers although I do think it should be discussed as it is problematic on other pages... For instance, the use of the words "Titles in Pretense" for hypothetical lines of succession ("Positions in Pretense" would be more appropriate there) and headers such as "British royalty" for a non-British royal above their position in the British line of succession. Charles 23:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I must say though that I wholly object to the use "British royalty", for example, for a position in the line of succession to the UK throne unless one is a British royal. It seems to me to be a messy and problematic extension of the term royalty. I will try to follow this situation as it has gained my interest. I see how helpful the various templates can be and see some that I think should be fixed. Charles 04:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Could I suggest that you bring this up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada before implementing the changes? WP:SBS is not policy, and I suspect that others in this project might also have objections.

My primary concern is that your change removes the "colour coding" for cabinet minister headers. CJCurrie 21:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Succession Boxes

It says that {{Succession box two to one U.S. Rep to Senator}} and {{Succession box one to two U.S. Rep to Senator}} are still under consideration ... shouldn't the issues be discussed and decided upon before people remove or replace boxes?--Dr who1975 23:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:WAF / succession boxes

After looking through the pages you quoted in your edit summary and finding no consensus to allow succession boxes for articles about fictional subjects, I reverted your change. You're welcome to open a discussion at WT:WAF. May I remind you however, that policy discussion never works as a vote where things get "voted down". Best regards, —AldeBaer 13:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Good question. I suppose one way would be to make a new section at WT:WAF, announcing a "test run" limited to a specified set of articles (say, all Star Wars Sith Lords) for the purpose of having an example in a shortly to be started new discussion about succession boxes in fiction articles. If someone reverts, politely point them to the WAF talk page, asking for a little time to get the articles ready to use as an example in that new succession box discussion. —AldeBaer 16:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Wrt 2/3 majority: As pointed out above, policy discussion is primarily a discussion. Majorities, if not totally meaningless, are much less important than the arguments brought forth by the respective participants. —AldeBaer 16:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I was going to comment on the usage of the succession boxes (and I have not deleted them in the noted articles as of yet - cannot speak for others, though), but I am not precisely sure where you wanted folk to do so. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

As anticipated, the sucession boxes were removed by another editor, citing WAF. Instead of trying to force the changes and hope against hope that no one reverts, I think you might want to address the discussion of this in WAF exclusively (effecively bypassing the illwill and frciton form reverting), and make a post to the HP wikiprojects Discussion page notifing them of the discussion.
I think Bear is being a bit cynical about the capacity for a group of sensible folk (who generally outnumber the utter dolts who should be editorially skinned alive and rubbed with sea salt); a lot of solid policy comes out of these discussions, and I think you weaken any stance by not seeking such cooperation. I do not recommend making changes to articles without having having a WAF change. Change and self-reverts to provide examples are fine, but that isn't the case here. However, you now have a 'with' and 'without' example to use in your argument in WAF. Keep me appraised. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi there! I've reverted all the SB that I've come across, but I'd like to explain my reasoning instead of anyone thinking I'm just being a prick. First and foremost, there's WP:WAF. It's pretty clear that SB are inappropriate for fictional characters. If this is changed at some point, so be it. But as for now, that's the policy. Furthermore, I feel particularly adamant about this stance in regards to Harry Potter articles. Simply put, I don't believe there is enough information to justify SB in these articles, even if they were allowed. For all the positions in the series (professors, Minister of Magic, Headmaster of Hogwarts, etc.), there are only a few characters know to have held these positions. For instance, we only know of two transfiguration profs (and there's no proof that they serve in succession), one charms prof (I think), and four or five Ministers (which is actually probably the most deserving as far as having available information, which is an indictment of just how unnecessary these boxes are). Again, not trying to be a jerk, they just don't belong (at least for now). Faithlessthewonderboy 23:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I've proposed a different method of pursuing htis matter that doesn't require you being disruptive, and you have chosen to ignore that. As Faithless says, this is not current policy, and until it is, there aren't going to be any succession boxes in the articles. Your forcingthe issue is going to garner an exceptionally negative response, and likely damage the possibility that your proposal will receive anything but excoriation. I will be reverting these "tests". Immediately. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay,maybe you aren't being a dick here, and I am over-reacting (dealt with a few too many jerks over the past few days). I will help you in any way you request. Please - do not test-market your succession boxes anymore. You've built up a set of versions to use - and a fair amount of antipathy for not self-reverting those examples immediately. It gives people the wrong idea - myself included. Let's go over to WAF and propose it again. I will ask folk to hear you out without shooting you down without listening. Does that sound like a fair idea? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 01:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:s-start-collapsible

Thanks for your message a few days ago on my talk page regarding this template. I am on something of a wikibreak and can't get too involved in this right now. I will just say that as far as I could tell the original design and implementation of that template by User:Zyxw looked ideal to me, at least visually, including the centering. I had made an informal request for such a template at WT:SBS a few weeks ago and this seemed to fit the bill. You can find my thoughts on colouring on that page as well. heqs ·:. 14:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Succession box four to four

Hi, I saw your deletion request, unfortunatly pages still link to this template. See the what links here portion. I don't mind deleting if you can clear those out, otherwise nominate the template at templates for deletion. Cheers :) —— Eagle101Need help? 00:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Same thing at Template:Succession footnote. Clear all pages, or nominate to WP:TFD. —— Eagle101Need help? 00:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Succession template Step does not conform to standard of S-start

"If you find a succession template not in this standard, please contact Whaleyland." Well, there you go: Template:Step. --the Wild Falcon (talk | contributions) 18:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Memo – Communications

Really, Darius, I do realise that you are busy but you surely have a quarter hour to spare in order to answer my last message? With this low turnout at SBS, it is essential that we keep an open communication channel in order to solve the issues that turn up.

In any case, my last message is a little outdated, but there are so many new things to say that it is not worth replacing it; I should rather that you read my message and briefly reply to it and I can then bring up the new issues in the agenda.

Even before you do that, however, I need to bring to your attention the fact that, without contributors, no motions or proposals can be voted on and no progress will be noted on policy matters. Needless to say, this is disastrous for our cause, given the high number of outstanding problems. I request that you allow me to start the recruiting campaign and approaching other WikiProjects with which we shall be required to cooperate. You are too busy to attend to everyday business here at the project, and I think that it ought to be excused if I should act somewhat more freely for the moment.

Other relatively urgent issues are the finalisation of the s-new and s-vac parameters, as well as the introduction of parameters for s-inc; the evaluation of the new, and hideously coloured, s-freemasons header; and the integration of s-npo into the order of headers.

Well? Waltham, The Duke of 23:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, that is a hideous and amazingly popular templates (considering its length of existence). I do believe it must be integrated either into npo or something else already in existence. Regardless, I will attempt to do a more thorough reply tomorrow. Since school started and work picked up about a month ago, attempting to wiki more than thirty minutes a day has been near impossible, but I shall try and hope that tomorrow is not like most Mondays. Until then, adieu.
–Darius von Whaleyland, Great Khan of the Barbarian Horde 07:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Memo – Freemasonry header

I should not have bothered you otherwise, but I believe that it is prudent to make arrangements for all eventualities. I have noticed your creation of a parameter in s-npo for Freemasonry offices. I find that this is a first step towards the right direction. S-freemason is incorporated in less than a hundred succession boxes, so the damage is still reversible. However, I suggest that we do not proceed with the substitution before I receive an answer to the message I have left in the template's creator's talk page. I think it is better to wait than to get involved in a potential edit war, or worse.

Also, I have proceeded with the creation of the Cheatsheet. I have categorised it, linked it to the main SBS page, added it to the navigation box, and assigned it a shortcut. I hope you like the page (and its shortcut). I have also cleaned up SBS's category, branching off a new one for members.

By the way, the title of the message is a consequence of my new message titling scheme. My messages in other SBS members' talk pages will be hence titled as "Memo", "Page", "News", or "Note", depending on their content and character. Waltham, The Duke of 11:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: We have the green light for the change. I am pulling out all the stops for the substitutions, Darius—there is a lot of work to do! Waltham, The Duke of 13:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Template documentation

I suggest you peruse Wikipedia:Template documentation. The standard is to use a /doc page and the templates designed to work with it. I also suggest using {{Template sandbox notice}} to add a sandbox page. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Ancestry

Where was it decided to remove the ancestry templates? Would you please stop doing that and actually discuss it with some people who maintain them? You may or may not have people agree with you. Charles 00:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Long time, no see...

Hello, Darius! So much to say, so little time... I guess you are busy outside Wikipedia—I remember that you had quite a lot on your plate. In any case, there are a couple of things I wanted you to know:

  1. I have substituted most of the examples in the Documentation page, and I am continuing with this task in my spare time. I believe it is coming up nicely. I am trying to find examples that are not only good as examples but also belong to famous personalities, so as to make the page more glamorous and create a sense of familiarity in the readers.
  2. As far as s-urp is concerned, I will support either of the moves you have proposed (the delegation of its functions to templates s-bef and s-aft as parameters, and its overall deletion). It is indeed rather superfluous, now that I come to think of it, and its scarce usage.
  3. You will be happy to know that the dates have finally been removed from the British prliamentary headers. It's a good thing to have an administrator handy. I have closed and archived the relevant conversation (the decision was unanimous).
  4. Have you used the new "dynasty" parameter anywhere? I need to see how it works, so that I can document it better and provide an example about it in the Documentation page.
  5. I have created a template that can be used in the succession templates' talk pages in order to encourage editors to post in SBS's talk page instead of there, as well as to promote SBS. The template is at Template:SBS template and is this:


Logo of the SBS

This template is within the scope of the Succession Box Standardization WikiProject, a collaborative effort to bring all succession boxes across Wikipedia up to a specific set of standards.
If there is something you would like to discuss about this template, it is strongly suggested that you do so in the project's talk page.
If you would like to participate in SBS, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Any suggestions are, of course, most welcome. (By the way, I have a proposal in store for a new SBS logo, although I would not necessarily say that it is a final design.)

Well, this is it. I have tried to be succinct. Take your time to answer; whenever you do, I shall be happy to hear from you. May the sun illuminate the road to your glory, and may the stars show you the way to your greatness. Until next time, Waltham, The Duke of 23:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I see that you are busy. I have therefore decided to take the initiative on the following two matters pertaining to the Documentation page:
  • Remove the section describing Template:S-urp
  • Replace the full list of headers with a representative list of the templates and of examples of their parameters, as a full list is overly long, unseemly, and difficult to maintain.
On another note, there is a "district" parameter in s-ttl which I believe is inactive, a result of your past experimentations with the template. Perhaps you could take care of its removal (or re-shaping into something more useful) at some time? Waltham, The Duke of 00:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)