Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes/Archive 10

"infobox bishopstyles"
I'm stuck. I've done a little work on Robert Finn (bishop). More recently, a coat of arms with a Latin motto has been added to the infobox which is set up under the "infobox bishopstyles" heading visible here. I tried to add a line for motto for an English translation but "motto=" didn't register. I found my way here in my search for what "infobox bishopstyles" was so as to find if I could find a way to enter the translation. I found the "Religion Topics" dropdown in this article but nothing there. No "bishopstyles" in a search of the article or in the archives of this Talk page. A search of all Wikipedia and wiki: also yielded nothing on "bishopstyles". Can anyone direct me on my way, here? I did check at Coat of arms and seem to be on the right path (with the right term: motto), substantively; and feel an English translation is appropriate for the encyclopedia and the article.

I do anticipate one further problem once I find a way into the infobox so I'll house the whole edit here for the time being, too; in short, I'm relying on Google Translate for my translation. I seem to recall problems using a Google-based citation. I'm prepared to cross that bridge when I get to it but am open to comment on it here, too. Here's the line I want to add to the Finn infobox: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God"

Any help appreciated. Thanks. Swliv (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * try using Infobox Christian leader. the styles templates are very limited by design. Frietjes (talk) 16:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Good start, thanks Frietjes. But simple substitution of the "Infobox Christian leader" for the "bishopstyles" template certainly didn't work. Three specific parameters -- dipstyle=The Most Reverend; offstyle=Your Excellency; Monsignor; and relstyle=Bishop -- are excluded. The "leader" template would theoretically (per your linked page) include motto -- my goal -- though the motto also didn't come up in my first try with "leader".
 * I don't have time for much more now but also will want to think about providing a portal to the 'leader' page on this 'Manual' page; where currently only Latter Day Saints and another are touched under Religion.
 * If any further direction off this first cut, again appreciated. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 12:25, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * , I wasn't suggesting a complete replacement. see, for example, Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, Joseph Duffy (bishop), etc. Frietjes (talk) 13:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * , I have found no way INTO 'bishopstyles' to add "motto="; and, a little awkwardly (in practice), motto in "leader" template comes up under "Personal details" whereas I understand (and see, under "bishopstyles") the coat of arms (and hence motto I'm assuming) come/would come under "Styles" (also more connected to the diocese than to the individual bishop? that's how I'm seeing it for now). I've shown the best way I can work it out here at my Wiki sandbox; awkward-looking. More thoughts? Thanks for your help to here. I'll go with the sandbox version with explanation -- "motto translation; a bit jury-rigged but no motto option under 'bishopstyles', no way INTO 'b'styles' that I've found Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style" -- if there's nothing else, see how it flies.


 * If you could tell me how to get into "bishopstyles" I'm sure I could work with, say, "Caption" or some other available header; or, as I've said, add "Motto".


 * Looking at Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, the coat of arms doesn't have any Latin in it; but the article uses both '-styles' boxes; I'd have the same problem if there was Latin I wanted to show the translation for; as my sandbox version does but with the awkward doubling of Personal details some of which may not be so-much-personal details. Duffy of course has no coat of arms at all. Thanks again. Swliv (talk) 16:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * , I don't see a reason why the motto shouldn't be in "Infobox Christian leader" instead. if you want to change where the motto appears in "Infobox Christian leader", then you should start a thread at template talk:Infobox Christian leader, since there are more editors who watch that page than this one. Frietjes (talk) 16:51, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

, for better or worse (and I see now you specifically advised against it, above), I went to Template talk:Infobox bishop styles instead. And for your reference, incidentally, in case you hadn't already figured it out, I didn't know that I was looking for a template ("template:"); and I guess I didn't make that clear above exactly. Once you directed me to "template talk:Infobox Christian leader" and I worked there a while it dawned on me you'd given me the key to the other door as well. The joys. We'll see. Thanks again. Swliv (talk) 17:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Remedy six of the infoboxes arbcom case
See WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox for an initiative regarding this recommended remedy. --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment
There is currently an RfC at Talk:Ryukyu Kingdom concerning the MoS for infoboxes. Thank you.  ミーラー強斗武   (StG88ぬ会話) 19:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Salary
What is the BLP policy with salaries in an infobox? When noting an individual's income or salary on a BLP info box, do we include the dollar amount cited in a reliable source even if it includes other expenses or reimbursements? Thanks! Meatsgains (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Disinfoboxes
This is one of very many infobox essays, and a highly contentious one at that. Please try finding a better excuse for reverting than "the links ... might be only indirectly related to the topic". Alakzi (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * That link should not, of course, be there; but until the matter is resolved, I've added another, for balance. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I think, WP:SEEALSO – and WP:LSAS – provide good arguments to keep that link in this guideline, as it has been since when it was added by  User:Rjanag. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC notice: Ethnicity in infoboxes
Village pump (policy) for ongoing RfC to remove ethnicity from infoboxes. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

RfC notice: Religion in biographical infoboxes
Village pump (policy) for new RfC to remove religion from (except where consensus determines it is directly relevant to why the subject is notable). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

WikInfoboxer: A tool to help users create infoboxes
The current creation of Wikipedia infoboxes is based on templates that are created and maintained collaboratively. While templates provide a standardized way of representing infobox information across Wikipedia articles, they pose several challenges. Different communities use different infobox templates for the same category articles; a template designed for a specific category of articles is used for other different categories and its attributes are miss-understood; attribute names differ (e.g., date of birth vs. birthdate), and attribute values are expressed using a wide variety of measurements and units. Finally, templates are free form in nature; when users fill attribute values no integrity check is performed on whether value is of appropriate type for the given attribute, often leading to erroneous infoboxes.

Guiding contributors in the creation of infoboxes would mean creating richer and more correct information.We are working on the Infoboxer system, which is a tool grounded in Semantic Web technologies that overcomes challenges in creating and updating infoboxes, along the way making the process easier for users. We have developed a simple research prototype of Infoboxer to test our ideas (http://sid01.cps.unizar.es/). However, as a research prototype, it is not ready to be used by Wikipedia editors yet. Therefore, we are applying for a Wikimedia Individual Engagement Grant which would enable us to transform a simple research prototype in a useful tool ready to be used for editors to create infoboxes for Wikipedia pages.

Please give us your advice in the discussion board of the proposal: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IEG/WikInfoboxer

--raqueltl (talk) 17:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Wikidata in infoboxes, opt-in or opt-out?
Wikidata has begun to be automatically imported into infobox fields. Should this be opt-in or opt-out? Please take part in the discussion at Village pump (policy). Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 01:18, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:Types of state
At the bottom of State (polity) is the infobox Template:Types of state. At first I thought it was a navbox, but apparently not. I was rather confused by it, as it was collapsed, yet its references were displaying. Is this an appropriate way to format and display an infobox? It also appears in a few other articles. Nurg (talk) 08:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Module:InfoboxImage
I made a change to WP:INFOBOXIMAGE to clarify that Module:InfoboxImage should be called if it has been implemented in your infobox. If you are adding images to an infobox that doesn't implement all the parameters the module offers, then you may use  etc to access the same functionality. It would be great if the module was working on all infoboxes but if it's not you can still do what you need to do. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Infoboximage
There's a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace relating to this topic. Cabayi (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Michael Portillo
There's a discussion going on at the above page about the size of the infobox. The article's subject is a former British politician. Some editors think that in political biographies the subject's predecessor and successor in every political post should be listed in the infobox. This makes the box extremely large. Moreover, much of this information is not already in the article; and all of the information could be gleaned by anyone who wants it from the templates at the foot of the article. In arguing against the 'large' box I have cited WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE -"When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored). The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance". The arguments offered in favour boil down to the assertion that very many other politicians' biographies have such a large infobox. I would be interested to have opinions as to whether the serial by-passing of the MoS guideline elsewhere justifies proposals to set it aside in a particular article. Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 17:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * 1. This doesn't make the box 'extremely large' – if you want 'extremely large', look at Winston Churchill. 2. The argument isn't that 'very many' other politicians' biographies have 'such a large infobox'; it's that every other politician's biography has an infobox like this because it makes things materially more convenient for readers, especially those using a mobile or tablet. 3. Given that virtually everyone who has contributed to the infobox of a politician's biography seemingly agrees with me on the interpretation of the MOS (i.e. that predecessors and successors are 'key facts'), I would gently suggest to you that, however well intentioned, you might yourself have misinterpreted it. Regards, Specto73 (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Section-level infobox usage
I think the Using infoboxes in articles section should explicitly mention: Infoboxes need not be placed at the top of an article and can be used at the start of sections where such usage adds clarity. An example can be found at (while noting that, in this case, the infobox is near the end of the section – rather clumsy and not to be encouraged). Of course if section-level usage is not acceptable, then the style manual should explicitly say so. That seems unlikely seeing that the lead in this article contains the phrase "usually in the top right of an article". Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there a case where the presentation of an infobox not being in the top right has caused dispute? --Izno (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Listing the successor of an incumbent politician
Hello. For an incumbent politician, should we list the presumptive successor on the infobox before the succession has taken place? (e.g. listing Donald Trump as the elected successor to Barack Obama before January 20, 2017.) The current consensus appears to be "no", as shown on George W. Bush's talk page in 2008, and the growing consensus on Barack Obama's talk page.

If this is the correct interpretation of the consensus, should we modify this MOS page to give Wiki-wide guidance against listing the successor until the transition has completed? Edge3 (talk) 04:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with your idea but not its implementation. This would likely make the most sense in the documentation for infobox politician - you could just add the second sentence of what you added here, there instead. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I've edited the template documentation as you suggested. Edge3 (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Infoboxes – optional plural parameters – removing (s) from labels
Hi all, I've started a discussion at WP:VPR about the possibility of removing "(s)" from the end of labels, and would appreciate your thoughts there! &#8209;&#8209; Yodin T 20:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Removal of data, and Wikidata
Please see Village pump (policy), which suggests a change to template policy. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Do not include intra-article section links
I decided to read this page to see the guidelines concerning section links and was disappointed to see it say "Do not include links to sections within the article; the table of contents provides that function" as added back in 2010. I decided to check the archives and could not find any discussion concerning this addition. Infoboxes are often the first thing that readers look at, and especially with some mobile formats, seeing a subject and then going to check for a section in a table of contents (assuming the device being used even has a TOC) can be an unnecessary extra hassle. This discounts the fact that on some pages, a reader may not even be immediately aware that the subject in the infobox that would otherwise have a piped section link to a specific part of the article even has a section in the first place. At the very least, I'd hope this sentence could be made less outright in its rejection of intra-article section links. Anyway, if section links are going to be rejected like this, then why is it even possible to link sections within the same page? Links like this. Dustin ( talk ) 01:52, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, for example, Template:Infobox country has links such as . If the country doesn't have an article on its demographics, the reader is still going to expect there to be a link pointing towards information on the country's demographics, so I add a direct link to the using:, else it would either have no link, or more likely would go through a redirect back to the page. The intra-article link here is helpful to the reader. I get the principal of the guideline, but I agree it shouldn't be outright regarded as bad.  Rob984 (talk) 21:41, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I've boldly changed it to "Avoid links to sections within the article..." per your comments — Iadmc  ♫ talk  10:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Infobox template
Is there a page, or link on this article that redirects to an infobox template? I can't make heads or tails on how to write the template out. Thanks. Boomer VialHolla 22:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's unclear what you want but let's keep the discussion in one place at Help desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)