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 1 |
Shouldn't this template use the meta template {{ Infobox}} as for example {{ Infobox Person}} do? Nsaa ( talk) 22:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
How about parameters like alma mater
or workplace
(for the current institute or university)? ––
Bender235 (
talk)
13:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm reading complaints about people who don't like the formatting of the template. The way the economist's "category" is emblazened in a colorful banner as if that's the person's name. Could we improve the look of the template? Something like Template:Infobox Scientist would be fine. Thanks. DavidRF ( talk) 22:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I like the idea of distinguishing colors in the infobox, one for each school of economic thought. Kinda like we use it in sports (e.g. Tom Brady, DeMarcus Ware) to elucidate which people play on the same team. Which colors exactly is pretty much up for debate, but I suggest using those from the different navboxes. Thoughts? -- bender235 ( talk) 16:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
A
project I'm running, and a
related event in mid-January will soon add around a thousand recordings of article subjects' voices to their biographies. I'd like to embed those in the relevant infoboxes, as in
this example (using {{
Infobox person}}). Can we add the necessary |module=
parameter to this template?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
16:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Omnipaedista: I already motivated my changes in the edit summary: "showing the school/tradition as a big coloured banner above everything else gives it WP:UNDUE prominence". Given that in the version that you just restored this is a colorful banner above everything else, I don't see how this cannot be the case.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 14:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Agree with those suggesting UNDUE. This appears to be an attempt to divide economists into factions, pitting ideological labels against each other. Similarly, I suspect that many of those labels represent synthesis or original research, as economists don't subscribe to a "school labelling" organization like a fraternity. aprock ( talk) 14:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
BTW: I have posted a notification of this discussion on the Econ & Infobox Project talk pages. – S. Rich ( talk) 23:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
When the "Opposed" line is used, what comes out is a line saying Opposed and then a list of names. Reading that I am not sure what it means - I first read it at Peter Schiff who is running for Senate, so it could mean "people he is opposed to in general", "people who oppose him", "people opposing him in the upcoming election", "people whose policies he opposes"... etc.
I think there is a difference between "people he is opposed to" and "people whose policies he is opposed to", one is personal. Anyway the word "opposed" on it's own doesn't really say much, in my opinion. The template page says it is important to have it there, but in that case shouldn't it be more obvious for the encyclopedia reader just what it means? Thanks. Weakopedia ( talk) 23:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
After waiting a good deal of time for feedback on this, I went ahead and removed the label. I was reverted without any policy rationale. I will go ahead and remove the item as original research and synthesis unless someone can make an argument that this is something that belongs in the infobox. aprock ( talk) 15:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
BTW: I have posted a notification of this discussion on the Econ & Infobox Project talk pages. – S. Rich ( talk) 23:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Per the discussion above, I have again removed the field. aprock ( talk) 05:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@ Aprock: @ Srich32977: @ Steeletrap: Regarding the recent revert: I also support the removal of this parameter, and from the discussion I can see that there is a consensus for that. The supposed existence of a 'silent majority' in favour of keeping it cannot be used as an excuse to ignore the outcome of this discussion.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 02:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
For content which appears to go against policy and guidelines, consensus is needed for inclusion, not exclusion. aprock ( talk) 04:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
For the sake of consistency can we have this infobox look more like Template:Infobox person? Infobox person is the basis of infoboxes for many biographies, e.g. Template:Infobox officeholder (for politicians, government officials, etc) follows the same style. Infobox economists kinda sticks out like a sore thumb cause the name is stuck outside the box. Darx9url ( talk) 10:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Also, can we have " honorific_prefix = " implemented? Darx9url ( talk) 10:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm working on the infobox for /info/en/?search=Draft:Katharine_Abraham, and I'd like to use several of the economist infobox fields, without losing officeholder infobox fields such as
|office1 = |president1 = |term_end1 = |predecessor1 = |successor1 =
Is there a good way to mix together elements of the economist and officeholder infobox items for a person who is both? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAWH ( talk • contribs) 15:12, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
I have checked
Category:Pages using infobox economist with unknown parameters (0). First I have OK-ed |color=
that is still present in ~400 parameters (editing them would be trivial).
I also met these parameters, maybe they could be added:
|occupation=
|residence=
|ethnicity=
(unk in parent template {{
Infobox person}}!)|relatives=
(parents, children) - useful when they are known/wikilinked?|religion=
(?)In some cases I have turned that info into |notes=
. -
DePiep (
talk)
00:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I propose getting rid of the parameter "influenced = ". First, there's no way to tell from the text of an article who the person has influenced. With "influences", we can check in the article itself. When a name is added to "influenced" we can't tell what is real and what is spam. Second, there is no reasonable rule we can follow about whether an influenced person should be added to the infobox. Third, the category is a magnet for spam, with fans adding their own names, or adding various other names in order to bulk out the "influenced" list of their heroes. I see no reason to keep the "influenced" parameter. LK ( talk) 13:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Should this template have the parameter "influenced" (meaning those people who the economist has influenced as an economist)? And if it does, what criteria should be used to determine what names may be added to that parameter? LK ( talk) 00:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
scope_creep ( talk) 10:34, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
To be more consistent with the {{ Infobox scientist}} and {{ Infobox academic}} templates, I would like to suggest the additions of the parameters | thesis_title = , | thesis_url = and | thesis_year = be added to this template so readers can quickly access the person's doctoral thesis. To get around this current limitation, I have noticed that some editors are inappropriately using the {{ Infobox scientist}} template in place of the more appropirate {{ Infobox economist}} template for articles about economists. -- 68.50.32.85 ( talk) 01:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi CelebrityBuzz - in the recent edits you made to the template are you able to explain the coloured (yellow) backgrounds added to the header fields? My slight concern is over accessibility - for example the infoboxes for 'Academic' and 'Scientist' just use a bold centred effect ( Template:Infobox_academic, Template:Infobox scientist), and adding colour can have unintended side effects.
Are you able to comment on your thinking at all please? Quite00 ( talk) 22:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Something in Special:Diff/947197834 made the "Institution" field disappear from the infobox. I don't know template syntax well enough to figure out what caused the problem. Pinging CelebrityBuzz. Wikiacc ( ¶) 15:48, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
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 1 |
Shouldn't this template use the meta template {{ Infobox}} as for example {{ Infobox Person}} do? Nsaa ( talk) 22:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
How about parameters like alma mater
or workplace
(for the current institute or university)? ––
Bender235 (
talk)
13:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm reading complaints about people who don't like the formatting of the template. The way the economist's "category" is emblazened in a colorful banner as if that's the person's name. Could we improve the look of the template? Something like Template:Infobox Scientist would be fine. Thanks. DavidRF ( talk) 22:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I like the idea of distinguishing colors in the infobox, one for each school of economic thought. Kinda like we use it in sports (e.g. Tom Brady, DeMarcus Ware) to elucidate which people play on the same team. Which colors exactly is pretty much up for debate, but I suggest using those from the different navboxes. Thoughts? -- bender235 ( talk) 16:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
A
project I'm running, and a
related event in mid-January will soon add around a thousand recordings of article subjects' voices to their biographies. I'd like to embed those in the relevant infoboxes, as in
this example (using {{
Infobox person}}). Can we add the necessary |module=
parameter to this template?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
16:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Omnipaedista: I already motivated my changes in the edit summary: "showing the school/tradition as a big coloured banner above everything else gives it WP:UNDUE prominence". Given that in the version that you just restored this is a colorful banner above everything else, I don't see how this cannot be the case.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 14:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Agree with those suggesting UNDUE. This appears to be an attempt to divide economists into factions, pitting ideological labels against each other. Similarly, I suspect that many of those labels represent synthesis or original research, as economists don't subscribe to a "school labelling" organization like a fraternity. aprock ( talk) 14:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
BTW: I have posted a notification of this discussion on the Econ & Infobox Project talk pages. – S. Rich ( talk) 23:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
When the "Opposed" line is used, what comes out is a line saying Opposed and then a list of names. Reading that I am not sure what it means - I first read it at Peter Schiff who is running for Senate, so it could mean "people he is opposed to in general", "people who oppose him", "people opposing him in the upcoming election", "people whose policies he opposes"... etc.
I think there is a difference between "people he is opposed to" and "people whose policies he is opposed to", one is personal. Anyway the word "opposed" on it's own doesn't really say much, in my opinion. The template page says it is important to have it there, but in that case shouldn't it be more obvious for the encyclopedia reader just what it means? Thanks. Weakopedia ( talk) 23:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
After waiting a good deal of time for feedback on this, I went ahead and removed the label. I was reverted without any policy rationale. I will go ahead and remove the item as original research and synthesis unless someone can make an argument that this is something that belongs in the infobox. aprock ( talk) 15:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
BTW: I have posted a notification of this discussion on the Econ & Infobox Project talk pages. – S. Rich ( talk) 23:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Per the discussion above, I have again removed the field. aprock ( talk) 05:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@ Aprock: @ Srich32977: @ Steeletrap: Regarding the recent revert: I also support the removal of this parameter, and from the discussion I can see that there is a consensus for that. The supposed existence of a 'silent majority' in favour of keeping it cannot be used as an excuse to ignore the outcome of this discussion.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 02:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
For content which appears to go against policy and guidelines, consensus is needed for inclusion, not exclusion. aprock ( talk) 04:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
For the sake of consistency can we have this infobox look more like Template:Infobox person? Infobox person is the basis of infoboxes for many biographies, e.g. Template:Infobox officeholder (for politicians, government officials, etc) follows the same style. Infobox economists kinda sticks out like a sore thumb cause the name is stuck outside the box. Darx9url ( talk) 10:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Also, can we have " honorific_prefix = " implemented? Darx9url ( talk) 10:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm working on the infobox for /info/en/?search=Draft:Katharine_Abraham, and I'd like to use several of the economist infobox fields, without losing officeholder infobox fields such as
|office1 = |president1 = |term_end1 = |predecessor1 = |successor1 =
Is there a good way to mix together elements of the economist and officeholder infobox items for a person who is both? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAWH ( talk • contribs) 15:12, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
I have checked
Category:Pages using infobox economist with unknown parameters (0). First I have OK-ed |color=
that is still present in ~400 parameters (editing them would be trivial).
I also met these parameters, maybe they could be added:
|occupation=
|residence=
|ethnicity=
(unk in parent template {{
Infobox person}}!)|relatives=
(parents, children) - useful when they are known/wikilinked?|religion=
(?)In some cases I have turned that info into |notes=
. -
DePiep (
talk)
00:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I propose getting rid of the parameter "influenced = ". First, there's no way to tell from the text of an article who the person has influenced. With "influences", we can check in the article itself. When a name is added to "influenced" we can't tell what is real and what is spam. Second, there is no reasonable rule we can follow about whether an influenced person should be added to the infobox. Third, the category is a magnet for spam, with fans adding their own names, or adding various other names in order to bulk out the "influenced" list of their heroes. I see no reason to keep the "influenced" parameter. LK ( talk) 13:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Should this template have the parameter "influenced" (meaning those people who the economist has influenced as an economist)? And if it does, what criteria should be used to determine what names may be added to that parameter? LK ( talk) 00:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
scope_creep ( talk) 10:34, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
To be more consistent with the {{ Infobox scientist}} and {{ Infobox academic}} templates, I would like to suggest the additions of the parameters | thesis_title = , | thesis_url = and | thesis_year = be added to this template so readers can quickly access the person's doctoral thesis. To get around this current limitation, I have noticed that some editors are inappropriately using the {{ Infobox scientist}} template in place of the more appropirate {{ Infobox economist}} template for articles about economists. -- 68.50.32.85 ( talk) 01:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi CelebrityBuzz - in the recent edits you made to the template are you able to explain the coloured (yellow) backgrounds added to the header fields? My slight concern is over accessibility - for example the infoboxes for 'Academic' and 'Scientist' just use a bold centred effect ( Template:Infobox_academic, Template:Infobox scientist), and adding colour can have unintended side effects.
Are you able to comment on your thinking at all please? Quite00 ( talk) 22:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Something in Special:Diff/947197834 made the "Institution" field disappear from the infobox. I don't know template syntax well enough to figure out what caused the problem. Pinging CelebrityBuzz. Wikiacc ( ¶) 15:48, 3 April 2020 (UTC)