Template talk:Infobox person/Archive 21

medaltemplates

A person
Medal record Representing Canada Ice sledge hockey Paralympic Games 2006 Torino Tournament

A person

Medal record Representing Canada Ice sledge hockey Paralympic Games 2006 Torino Tournament

I would like to add the Template:Infobox medal templates into this template using the standard 'medaltemplates' param. It requires two columns, so cant fit within the 'awards' parameter. The reason for this addition is sports people sometimes become as notable (or more notable) for occupations they take on after their sporting career. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

can you use the |module= parameter? Frietjes (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

That looks to be a suitable solution for the scenarios I have in mind. Much appreciated, and I hope this module approach is rolled out to other infoboxen. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

both embedding and modules are available in many other infoboxes, although there are many that don't support it yet. if you find one lacking such features, just let me know. Frietjes (talk) 23:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

you can also use {{infobox sportsperson}} instead, which is a fairly generic template. Frietjes (talk) 23:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

The sportsperson infobox lacks the relatives param, and maybe more. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Nationality

I recently removed the wording "Should only be used if nationality cannot be inferred from the birthplace" from the description of {{para|nationality}} because, as I said in my edit summary, it does not reflect current usage. I have been reverted with the unhelpful edit summary "rv". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

The parameter is often used incorrectly, yes. Just because something does not reflect current usage does not mean that you should unilaterally adjust the documentation to suit. For example, the vast majority of implementations of this infobox for India-related subjects misuse the parameter simply because the people that set it up on the various articles are clueless. Which is not the same thing as having consensus. The entire nationality/citizenship issue is more often than not impossible to verify except by inference anyway. Obviously, there are exceptions but they are relatively few, eg: Cyrus Pallonji Mistry.

I've got to be honest and say that I didn't really follow all of the recent palaver concerning infoboxes at ArbCom etc. However, you were involved and I am astonished that you decided to adjust the documentation in such a significant manner - there is bold and there is reckless; frankly, given the kerfuffles, you were really reckless here. Have you not had enough time in the spotlight of late? - Sitush (talk) 13:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I am new to this topic. Please point me to a relevant discussion explaining why nationality "should only be used if nationality cannot be inferred from the birthplace". I don't understand this limitation. I can think of many locations where the nation changed in history, and inferring would require historical knowledge or search. Verdi's birthplace was French when he was born, for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm at a loss as to why you think me reckless. And because a parameter is misused in a minority of cases is not a reason to advise editors not to use it, in others. Indeed, the misguided caution which I removed does nothing to resolve the examples you give. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Gerda, I agree that, for example, someone born in British India may have one of several modern nationalities and that they might be appropriately mentioned (if sourced). More generally, I think that all of you - Gerda, Andy and Nikkimaria - need to back off before this becomes another stupid war. "Go find something more useful to do", would be my advice because the next time this heads to ANI people are going to find themselves blocked etc. It is already obvious to me that battle lines are being drawn. - Sitush (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I hear "battle" too often. I try to find out why a restriction would be applied here for a single parameter, and if there was a discussion. In a different template, the wording is "The template is very general and therefore offers a great choice of parameters. For a given composition, use only those of relevance". I could imagine something like this here. The wording as it stands leaves no room to fill "nationality" when a reader could infer from a birth place, but might not easily be able. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you hear "battle" too often. Perhaps if you and others did not engage in this area then you would hear it less. I'm sure that you all mean well in your own ways but, really, there are far more important things to worry about than the content or even existence of infoboxes. I won't hesitate to take this to WP:AE if things escalate here. - Sitush (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me Sitush, but these two people know what they are doing and it is important to AGF on these issues. There is a much wider discussion of the role of infoboxes and the people who care need to not be shut down here. Personally, I am quite concerned that one or two other editors can freely screw things up all they want and emerge untouched, while the capable and knowledgable are sanctioned and told to go away. That is inappropriate. National identity is actually a very significant question, and frequently NOT in the least correlated to a person's birthplace, even when they may wind up famous in their homeland; look at the latest group of Nobel Prize winners, some of whom did their most significant work outside their nation of birth. Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I engage in this area, infobox person, only the second time, and I wish to ask a question related to the content, may I? Parameter nationality should normally be inferred from the content, I understand. Could our template editors please code that, so that |nationality= is (normally) taken from the place of birth, but can be overwritten by coding it and only then shown separately? - Can we say that mentioning nationality or not is a matter of taste (as having an infobox or not is a matter of taste)? - So, until we have a coded solution, could each editor please be permitted to code the field as they like, without being reverted? The present documentation says: "should", not "it's forbidden". - I personally don't care much about nationality. My very first discussion (2009) was about the nationality categories of musicians that I didn't understand. I support an editor who wrote in his editnotice: "The only real nation is humanity". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

That coding is unlikely to be feasible, and adding superfluous parameters to accommodate it undesirable. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

In my experience, there is no harm to adding extra coding and parameters. The people who don't know how to use them just don't use them, but they are there for the more syntax-savvy folks who do. There is no harm that I can see. I also think nationality is often very important, particularly for historical figures who became famous outside of their homelands. Also true for a lot of modern sports figures. And musicians, for that matter... one's birthplace seldom is the sole definer of who they are or where they identify their home. Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

On the contrary, the people who don't know how to use parameters often use them anyways - as can be seen from the problems Sitush mentions above. That's part of the harm. As to the rest of your statement, a) where nationality is not correlated with place of birth, we already say you can include it, and b) most sportspeople don't use this template, but something in Category:Sportsperson infobox templates. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

"People who don't know how to use parameters" is not the issue here; unsubstantiated assertions about them doubly so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

If we only enter nationality "if [it] cannot be inferred from the birthplace", then how do we differentiate between someone born in, for example, New York, and who is American, and someone born in New York whose nationality is not known, or not yet determined by us? |nationality=American is statement that the nationality is known; its absence is otherwise ambiguous. That is why it is rightly common practice to enter the subject's nationality, and why the wording I removed is both wrong and harmful. Wikipedia does sourced statements, not inferences. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

If someone is born in New York, they are assumed to be American unless we have sources to say otherwise. You cannot reasonably expect that everything that is known be filled in in the infobox, as that is contrary to both MOS:INFOBOX and common sense. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

"If someone is born in New York, they are assumed to be American unless we have sources to say otherwise." Bullshit. We assume nothing. Unless we have a source, we say nothing of the kind. What you describe is weaker even than original research. There are people born in New York to illegal immigrants, overseas diplomats, foreign tourists and people on a variety of other visas. None of them have US nationality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

You fail to understand the dramatic differences in "nationality" and citizenship laws. For example, Louisa Adams, first lady, wife of John Qunicy Adams, was born in Britain to a father who was an American diplomat. This is not an unusual situation; many famous people were born in a nation that is not necessarily their land of legal citizenship, or, as with Albert Einstein, left their native land to become a citizen of another nation. Montanabw^(talk) 23:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

And where their nationality and/or citizenship is not inferred from their place of birth, we can include it. @Andy, only the children of foreign diplomats are excluded from birthright citizenship; the other categories you mention are all generally held to be US citizens, and by extension hold US nationality (as all US citizens are automatically considered nationals). Nikkimaria (talk) 01:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Very well; substitute one of the many countries where such births do not confer nationality; my point stands. Further, people born in the USA to overseas parents will most likely not simply be American nationals, but have dual nationality. I note from my watchlist that you continue to remove nationality data from this template, in many articles. Please desist, until this dispute is resolved, since such mass edits will be difficult to reverse if consensus is against you. As such, I'm confident that sound-minded neutral third parties would view your continuing as disruptive. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

By your logic, we should be removing most of these parameters as unsourced anyways, regardless of what the documentation is or will be. Again, where nationality cannot be inferred simply from place of birth (as with dual nationals), we already provide for its inclusion. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Redux

Unfortunately, despite there being no resolution here, and ignoring my words of caution above, Nikkimaria has begun again to mass-remove nationality data from instances of this infobox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Given that discussion ended two months ago with no change, your efforts to add the parameter contrary to the template documentation is inappropriate. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:44, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

To reiterate, for clarity: "I note from my watchlist that you continue to remove nationality data from this template, in many articles. Please desist, until this dispute is resolved, since such mass edits will be difficult to reverse if consensus is against you. As such, I'm confident that sound-minded neutral third parties would view your continuing as disruptive". There was and is no support for your mass - or any - removal of this information. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Nikkimaria is now claiming, elsewhere, that this matter is "resolved" (in her favour, of course) and she continues to remove nationality data from many infoboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

This issue has arisen again, and is being discussed, at Talk:Florence Mildred White#Nationality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Inferring

I recently added a clarification to the wording discussed above ("Should only be used if nationality cannot be inferred from the birthplace"), saying ""note that many countries do not automatically grant citizenship to people born within their borders". The addition has been reverted (guess who by) with no reason in the edit summary (just "rvt"), and no comment made on this page.

The clarification should be restored; at least pending resolution of the issue discussed above (which should see the disputed wording removed). Justification for doing so, for example, is http://www.childrenslegalcentre.com/index.php?page=FAQ_UKBAandgovernmentpolicy_question_12 - as RexxS has noted elsewhere, "the law prior to 1983 was even more restrictive than it is now". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the guidance. It needs to be made clear that in many countries - the UK being a prime example - a person's nationality cannot be inferred simply from their birthplace. Being born a British subject depends on parental status, since a child born to foreign parents in the UK is not automatically a British subject, while children born to British parents anywhere in the world are British subjects. Without this clarification, it is quite likely that American editors will remove the parameter in the mistaken belief that other countries have the same citizenship rules as the US. --RexxS (talk) 15:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, though that still leaves the issue of people born in America who, though they might automatically be entitled to US nationality (and even then, not in some circumstances, such as the children of diplomats); but might have dual nationality. Do you have any views on how to resolve the issues discussed above? In other words, under what circumstances can "nationality be inferred from the birthplace", with out original research, if not logical flaws? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits

I think we have to apply common sense. The US rules are intended to make place of birth a key factor in deciding citizenship and the overwhelming majority of children born on US territory will be US citizens. In the UK where the key issue is the parents' status (and previously the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the child), historically there will be significant numbers of UK-born children who are not British subjects. In modern times where immigration to the UK from outside the EU has been restricted, and yet residence in the UK is open to any EU citizen, it is equally difficult to infer nationality from a UK birthplace. I would suggest a rule of thumb that a US birthplace alone is sufficient to infer nationality; while in the UK it is not. There are exceptions of course: George Washington's birthplace is Colonial Beach, Virginia, USA - but he was born a British subject. --RexxS (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

From a cursory survey of articles in Category:Nationality law, mere location at birth does not confer nationality in Eire, Australia, Sweden, Israel, Japan, Tonga, South Korea, Thailand, Angola, Estonia, Egypt, Germany, or Russia. The only exception I found was Brazil. So it seems quite likely that the situation in the USA and Brazil is the exception, not the rule. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

In Germany, things are complicated: legislature to make German nationality available in addition to a different first one of children born in Germany is under discussion. It would be so much easier, if an editor (who possibly knows the conditions in a specific case best) could decide if nationality/nationalities should be part of an infobox, and if our rules/documentation leave room for that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

There is already provision to potentially include the parameter in cases where it does not match the birthplace; the problem is that in many cases, particularly where the documentation is lacking, parameters are added where unneeded, or are misused. We want to avoid that, in keeping with the infobox guidelines. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Please let me understand what precisely you mean by "the documentation" and "misused". Who defines, what you call "unneeded". If something helps a reader not to have to infer (which sounds a bit like "jump to conclusions"), I might call it helpful, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

How is the reader to differentiate between cases where a subject's nationality is omitted from the infobox because it matches [sic] their birthplace; is not known; or has simply been overlooked by whoever set up the infobox? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

How do nationality and citizenship fields differ in this respect? If some boxes complete the citizenship field and others do not, those readers aware of the field cannot reliably judge whether citizenship has been overlooked or we don't know citizenship or one of us has deleted that value (or we have never completed the field) because its display seemed (would seem) repetitive?

Broadly this point holds for every field. When we don't complete the dewey field of {{infobox book}} with a Dewey Decimal Classification --perhaps display something like 813.1 meaning U.S. fiction-- who knows whether we have overlooked the field, or failed to ascertain its value, or judged its display uninformative? Editors don't know unless we WP:COMMENT and they examine the code.

To complete any field that has consequences for the display is informative in some respect, that we have no overlooked it, and usually informative in some other respect. --P64 (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Where do we suggest that people should, or can, infer a dewy reference from some other field? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I've moved Andy's original "clarification" to the "citizenship" parameter. Although some commentators above limit their discussion of nationality to the legal sense of the term, there does not seem to be any strong reason to restrict the use of the parameter to that meaning, and indeed as pointed out by RexxS elsewhere this would result in some counter-intuitive exclusions. Hopefully this will allow more flexibility in use of the parameter. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

The category discussed above (in keeping with all the articles in it) is called "Category:Nationality law", not "Category:Citizenship law". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:09, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Unidentified people

Hi, I have recently began creating pages about unidentified murder victims and the infobox person template isn't the best to use, as the height and weight for the victims is normally a range between two numbers, where the information looks a bit crammed into the infobox (articles such as Little Miss Lake Panasoffkee). It would have been more suitable if there was a 'maximum height/weight' and 'minimum height/weight' line for this information (as well as more). I was hoping to create another ifobox for these type of people, (not only the murder victims but also for the many other unidentified people who weren't necessarily murdered). I attempted to create my own infobox which has other additions besides the height and weight sections. Thank you! --GouramiWatcher^(?) 19:05, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

There's no need for separate parameters, nor for a separate infobox; just use a line break (<br />), as I have just done at Little Miss Lake Panasoffkee. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! --GouramiWatcher^(?) 02:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Help me Create Infobox for Other Language

I have been trying to create infobox person template for Oromo Wiki but with no success. I have tried to read the guidelines on creating infobox person and tried to use it but the information is not not complete. I even copied the source of infobox person from the English Wiki and pasted it and then saved it. But when I try to use the template in an article, it never shows. Is there a complete tutorial that can help me create it? Or is it possible to use the English infobox on other languages? Any help is appreciated. Thank you! Tumsaa (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 18 April 2014

Please update the template with the sandbox version here. The only visible change is the addition of a labelstyle entry, for the reason given in the comment beside it (and tested here). Otherwise the changes are internal:

• width as an alternative to (the more cumbersome) box_width;
• amended code layout for the sake of [increasing] comprehensibility.

Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the Template:Infobox person/testcases#Alfred Nobel example, I don't see the benefit. If anything the layout is less comprehensible as the row material is disconnected from the row heading. DrKiernan (talk) 11:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I've just updated the sandbox accordingly; there should be no equals-signs left hanging (I'm guessing that's what you meant). Do you see the difference now (keeping label and data separate, bold notwithstanding)..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I can see that there is a greater space between the data and the label, which is fine. But for some reason on the "resting place" parameter the data is not on the same horizontal level as the label, and then there is a white space between the resting place data and the resting place co-ordinates. Everything else looks fine, thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

There is too much white space between the resting place and the coordinates. The resting place label and value are no longer vertically aligned (with each other). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I've disabled the request, until the above issues are resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)