Template talk:Infobox person

There seems to be certain things broken with this template. For example, the Job section does not appear even if something is entered. See J. P. Morgan and John Dewey for example. Only the first few are being shown. --penubag (talk) 08:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Job isn't in the coding, but occupation was. You'll have to fix each one that wouldn't show up. Synergy 08:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but what about wife (in John Dewey)?--penubag (talk) 08:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Wife is spouse. Synergy 09:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you. I'm not sure how I screwed all those up. --penubag (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its no big deal. Synergy 09:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion at Wikipedia:Simple talk about simplifying some of our infobox templates. I'm starting a discussion about simplifying this one by reducing the number of parameters. Below I have listed each of the parameters this template uses, with lines for "keep" and "remove" for each one. For any parameters you have an opinion on, please add your user name after either "keep" or "remove". If you think all parameters should be kept, please add your user name after "Keep all" at the top of the list instead of on the lines for individual parameters. I've added my user name on some of them, so you can see how I intended this to work

I have grouped some entries that would need to stay or go as a group. I also grouped the modules, which could stay or go individually, but are for the same kind of thing.

Please put general discussion after the list, not in the list. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all: Pigsonthewing, Djsasso, Fylbecatulous, Jim Michael
• honorific_prefix
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• name
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• honorific_suffix
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• native_name, native_name_lang (these go together)
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• image, image_size, alt, caption (these go together)
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• pronunciation
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• birth_name
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• birth_date
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• birth_place
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• baptised
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• disappeared_date
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• disappeared_place
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• disappeared_status
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• death_date
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• death_place
  • Keep: Auntof6
  • Remove:
• death_cause
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• body_discovered
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• resting_place
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• resting_place_coordinates
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• monuments
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• residence
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• nationality
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• other_names
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• ethnicity
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• citizenship
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• education
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• alma_mater
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• occupation
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• years_active
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• employer
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• organization
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• agent
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• known_for
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• notable_works
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• style
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• influences
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• influenced
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• home_town
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• salary
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• net_worth
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• height
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• weight
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• television
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• title, term, predecessor, successor (these go together)
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• party
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• movement
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• opponents
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• boards
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• religion, denomination (these go together)
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• criminal_charge, criminal_penalty, criminal_status (these go together)
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• spouse
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• partner
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• children
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• parents
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• relatives
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• callsign
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• awards
  • Keep:
  • Remove: Auntof6
• signature, signature_alt, signature_size (these go together)
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• module, module2, module3, module4, module5, module6 (these don't really go together, but they're the same kind of thing)
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• website
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• footnotes
  • Keep:
  • Remove:
• box_width
  • Keep:
  • Remove:

• My considerations for saying keep or delete were 1) whether the item could be better covered in the article text, 2) whether the item is important in many cases, and 3) whether the information is worth the "real estate" in the infobox. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I suggest you remove |name= and the image parameters from your straw poll. No-one sane would remove these. Baptism dates are necessary for people, such as Beethoven, from the early modern era in Europe, when baptism, not birth, records were kept. The numbered "module" parameters are necessary for embedding other templates inside this one, for example when we have an audio recording of the subject's voice. Pigsonthewing (talk) 12:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then you might want to put your user name under those. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all We should be identical to en's except for the wording which can be simplified as necessary. -DJSasso (talk) 12:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do we need to be the same as enwiki? If an article is transwikied from there and it specifies parameters that aren't in our version, they just won't show. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The most obvious reason is, just because we are simple wiki doesn't mean we cut out information. We just use simpler language. If its notable enough to be on en.wiki's template then it sure as heck is notable enough to be on ours. This is one of the biggest traps people fall into here, simple does not mean less information. It just means the information is presented in simpler language. Very much against removing parameters in infoboxes just for the sake of having less parameters. Now its one thing if the parameter is not a valuable piece of information, but that is not likely to be the case very often if at all in a template that has come from en.wiki. For example a number of the parameters you have !voted to remove above, are highly important pieces of information for the subjects those parameters would be used on. For example disappeared date on people that went missing, sort of the most important thing about them. Height and weight? Again some of the most important information for athletes that don't have a specific sport infobox. Remember infobox person is a catch all for any person who doesn't have a more specific infobox, so it needs to have all these parameters. -DJSasso (talk) 13:42, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • It is easier to keep all and delete empty parameters in an article that will never use them, than to have to hunt, find and add back a relevant one if it has been taken away. The infobox template that has way too many for my preference is infobox church. I have removed 3850 bytes of empty slots from a few stubs where all that remains after is around 1300 bytes. Fylbecatulous talk 18:48, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • This isn't about parameters coded without values, it's about simplifying the template so that the infobox doesn't overwhelm articles. An infobox doesn't need to provide for every piece of information about a subject -- that's what the article text is for. There was some discussion that our infoboxes don't need to have as much detail as they do (this being Simple English Wikipedia), so I started the discussion. If consensus here is that this one should keep what it has, then it won't be changed. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:10, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • That is sort of my point though, the infobox is intended to have all the major points about a subject to summarize the article. We don't remove such bits of information in an attempt to make things simple. And I don't really see how having less parameters really helps in that matter anyways. -DJSasso (talk) 19:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Maybe it needs all major points, but people disagree on what items are major. In any case, it's clear where you stand. Let's see what others think. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think all should be kept. Infoboxes are often copied here from en; simplifying some wording can be done of necessary. some of the parameters suggested for removal are very relevant on some articles. Examples of this are Education and Alma mater on David Cameron; Disappeared date and place on Natalee Holloway (if her article had an ibox); Parents and Relatives on Michael Douglas; criminal parameters on Max Clifford (if his article had an ibox; he's not notable for his criminality, but it's very relevant to his bio because his offending has put him in prison and has ended his career). In all these examples, the info is major, relevant and necessary. We don't appear to have a problem of trivia being added to many bio iboxes, so I don't see any advantage to removing fields. Jim Michael (talk) 22:27, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]