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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Can someone please lower the text size as in Template:Infobox Country? Thanks. ☆ CieloEstrellado 03:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
Please add the mark-up for an hCard microformat, per WP:UF, by adding:
class="vcard"
to the outer containerclass="fn org"
to the "Name"
table row.class="label"
to the td
containing {{{Location|}}}
.class="note"
to each of the rows for Elevation, Range, Prominence, Type, Volcanic Arc/Belt, Age, Last eruption and First ascent.Please also move the documentation, interwikis and categories to a /doc page, so that I can describe the above. Thank you. Andy Mabbett 12:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
Could we replace
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="label" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} {{{Location|}}}
with
|- class="adr" {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="region" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} {{{Location|}}}
It would put the location in the right microformat field (adress->region) rather than just a label. Thanks -- Qyd 21:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="adr" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} <span class="region">{{{Location|}}}</span>
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} <span class="adr"><span class="region">{{{Location|}}}</span></span>
would work just as well. -- Qyd 01:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I've updated the code to use wiki formatting; it's easier to read and doesn't require HTML comments. Additionally, I removed some redundant code (e.g., width:205px). The layout and usage should be identical. Cheers. -- MZMcBride 20:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}} Could the photo caption use a slightly smaller font?
by replacing:
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
with:
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; font-size:95%; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
or
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; font-size:smaller; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
or even
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br /><small>{{{Caption|}}}</small>
It would be closer to a standard image caption. Thanks. -- Qyd 17:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change the wikilink for the "Listing" row. Currently links to
Hill lists in the British Isles: please link to
Lists of mountains instead (to allow us to use listings in any country). Discussed at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Lists in Infobox. Thanks!
hike395 08:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible to add locator image functionality? Sometimes a picture of a mountain is not currently available but having locator image to the mountain is enough. For instance, in
Mount Leuser article. There is one example in
Template:Infobox Settlement which provides the functionality with pushpin_map
parameter. It would be good to have such feature in this template. —
Indon (
reply) — 09:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I was (over)bold and updated the visual look somewhat to reflect the design of other similar infoboxes. I hope I didn't screw anything up (well, I'm good at templates, but not exceptionally good). If I did, feel free to revert me (well, um, or call an administrator to do that through {{ editprotected}}). Duja ► 15:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Where was the discussion on adding a parent peak parameter? Mark J seems to have added it without any community discussion. RedWolf 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
The "Photo size" parameter seems to cause a problem if it exists but is empty. This is because the template places a pipe symbol after the image name with nothing between that and the closing square brackets. I think an "if" block is needed. -- Ozhiker ( talk) 10:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Per a request on my talk page, I've added a pushpin location map. It uses almost the same exact coding that is used at {{
Infobox Settlement}}. Any map that has been created for {{
location map}} can be used (e.g. Nepal or Colorado). New coordinate fields were also added to facilitate this and those coordinate fields must be used to make the map work correctly. All the new fields are:
|pushpin_map =<!-- the name of a location map as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Location_map --> |pushpin_label_position = <!-- the position of the pushpin label: left, right, top, bottom, none --> |pushpin_map_caption = |pushpin_mapsize = |coordinates_ref= |latd= |latm= |lats= |latNS= |longd= |longm= |longs= |longEW=
—
MJCdetroit
(yak) 18:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
See Mount Everest for an example. — MJCdetroit (yak) 18:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Could the default mark be changed from "Red pog2.svg" to something like "RedMountain.svg"? -- Waltloc ( talk) 20:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The attribute Parent_peak does not seem to display. Is that meant to be the case? imars ( talk) 11:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The documentation was not in sync with the implementation. The actual parameter name is "Parent peak". I have fixed the documentation. RedWolf ( talk) 06:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
What I'm trying to say is having the "parent peak" field titled "parent peak" means it's only used for original subsidiary peaks like Little Tahoma. But if you have a field titled "parent" it can mean the subsidiary peak of the parent peak (e.g. Little Tahoma is a subsidiary peak of Mount Rainier) or the subsidiary peak of a mountain feature like the Silverthrone Caldera. Such a field would make the "parent peak" field more useful and both have prominence. Black Tusk ( talk) 16:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Right. So is there still any need for the "parent peak" field to be renamed "parent"? I can't see any. — ras52 ( talk) 00:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
io:Shablono:Monto. Thank you, Joao Xavier ( talk) 20:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Will somebody please reverse this edit, as "label", rather than "adr-location", is the correct hCard microformat value for non-specific address data such as "Washington, USA" (seen in [1], for example). Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
(Moved text here from Template talk:Infobox mountain that got moved there without explaination. – droll [chat] 17:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC))
09-March-2010: There appears to be a limit to nesting templates and if-expressions which use Template:Convert, because of Convert's "19-nested subtemplates" issue. Some articles using Template:Infobox mountain were getting parser-errors for conversions of the type elevation={{convert|97|m|ft}} but NOT when adding precision "|0" which uses 3 fewer subtemplates to determine the precision rounding (avoiding templates Ordomag, Ordomag/x, etc.):
I fixed that parser-error problem by simplifying a 3-nested if-expression, inside the nested infobox Template:Infobox mountain/main. That 3-nested if-expression had been:
Which had the nesting logic as:
Instead, the new logic has moved "elevation" outside the nested-if:
With that change, then typical Convert worked for elevation={{convert|97|m|ft}}. Also, tests would work when bypassing the top-nested infobox, and instead calling the inner {{ Infobox mountain/main}} as one less level of template-nesting. However, we shouldn't request users to stop using nested infoboxes, so the quick fix is to avoid using Convert in 3-nested-if expressions inside nested infoboxes. Long term, we need to see if we could combine some of the "19-nested subtemplates" which Convert uses to compute {{convert|97|m|ft}}. - Wikid77 ( talk) 14:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I've modified {{ Infobox mountain/main}} to pass the coordinates_ref= parameter to {{ Infobox coord}}, in order that title coordinates can be properly footnoted. If this causes any problems, feel free to revert my change. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 04:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
Please change:
|listing={{{Listing|{{{listing|}}}}}}
to:
|listing=<span class="category">{{{Listing|{{{listing|}}}}}}</span>
and:
|range={{{Range|{{{range|}}}}}}
to:
|range=<span class="category">{{{Range|{{{range|}}}}}}</span>
in order to emit additional hCard microformat properties (see the microformat project for more info). Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Thats not a secret that some mounts are located on borders. So there was an edit war in Mount Kazbek. This template is protected. So I decided to create new template for mounts on borders. with using {{infobox mountain/main}}. Initially I used {{infobox mountain on border/main}}.
I think it would be better if we realize two maps showing in this template.-- Bouron ( talk) 12:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
My expanded view for those who didn't read the discussion.
If article Coca cola is in categories "drinks" and in category "non-alcogol drinks"=>we should delete one of these categories. But if it is in "drinks" and "products of Coca-Cola company" why we should delete one of them.
Now we have mount as part of country and as part of MR. You think we should ignore one of it. But we can ignore one of them if first category is part of second or second is part of first. Neither MR is part of the country, nor country is part of MR.
In one day I will make a propose of solution.-- Bouron ( talk) 10:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I have a proposed compromise, similar to what Bouron and imars are saying, above. In the past, I've wanted to add a specialized map that illustrates the location of a mountain (e.g., a cropped topo map from the Forest Service, for example). This sort of map is not a locator map: it has the location of the mountain already shown in the image. With the current infobox, I have to give up on showing a photograph of the mountain to show the specialized map.
Proposal: Add a new field, called "custom_map" that does not call {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. Instead, it would be similar to the photo field. It can have "custom_map_size" and "custom_map_caption". It can be used for mountains on borders of countries (per Bouron, above). It can also be used to show topo maps and mountains that have multiple peaks or that are part of long ridges.
What do other editors think? — hike395 ( talk) 14:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I propose such form of template.
What do you think?
I proposed just an idea of combining of maps. Don't take attention on technical realization. -- Bouron ( talk) 20:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
If there is no photo we can put range LM to the top. and leave country LM in section "location". I haven't realized that yet.-- Bouron ( talk) 20:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I've been pondering these changes for a long time. Most, I think, are noncontroversial. I believe the best way to go about this is list them here for 7 days and if there are no oppositions or if there is consensus I'll implement them. Please comment below each item or make general comments at the end of this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Droll ( talk • contribs) 10:02, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure something can be done about the age thing. I've been thinking of something similar as the solution to a problem I see. I up with dropping the debate on #4 and coming up with a link or something like that unless someone else wants to chip in. Best wishes.
– droll [chat] 07:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)The proposed end of the comment period is on Thursday. On Wednesday evening, I'll write a summery of what I think the consensus is. That will give one day for you tell me if I've missed something.
– droll [chat] 06:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)It appears that 1,2,3,7 and 8 should be implemented and that 4, 5 and 6 should be retained. Any last minute comments are welcome. I'll implement the code changes in the sandboxes and update the documentation tomorrow. The I'll let RedWolf know when its ready to be moved into the active template. Thanks all. – droll [chat] 04:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
My peeve, again: Rounding to a tenth of a meter is often wrong. A lot of summit elevations are known only within one contour interval, e.g. ±10 ft. Converting that to a figure purportedly accurate to ±5 cm gives a false precision. This goes doubly so for prominence, for which both elevations are seldom accurately surveyed. Rounding such figures to the nearest 5 meters would be best.
—WWoods (
talk) 18:56, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree that many summit elevations can only be determined by examination of a topographic map and that the contour enclosing the summit underestimates the elevation. In cases like this I always specify the elevation using the syntax elevation=(contour elevation)+ ft (floor of conversion)+ m)
(e.g. elevation=1,680+ ft (512+ m)
). This indicates (clearly I think) that the elevation is not well known. The British use a different method (e.g. elevation=c. 510 m (1,673 ft)). I have seen cases where editors add half the contour interval to the encircling contour. That, IMHO, is wrong.
Prominence is a different issue, IMHO. We use clean prominence which has a very clear definition. Clean prominence can be defined as the difference between the elevation of the higher contour nearest the saddle or the saddle elevation, if it is known, and the contour line which encircles the summit or the summit elevation, if it is known. There are two other ways to calculate prominence, namely: optimistic prominence and mean prominence. Calculating clean prominence results in a known value and there is no false precision possible. Also I believe it is in keeping with Wiki policy to use cited information when it is available. Doing our own prominence calculations when there are reliable sources is contrary to the spirit of that policy.
I would certainly like to know the opinions of others on this issue. I am prone to categorical statements I know but I'm not always right. I might be wrong about the floor thing. I think we had that discussion before too.
P.S. perhaps we could arrive at some guidelines that would help new editors.
– droll [chat] 22:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)As to the prominence thing, I've been thinking about it and I think the advice I gave about is correct.
When the elevation is interpolated from a topo map and no elevation is given then the precision should not be over stated. It should be the elevation of the closed contour, IMHO. Maybe we can discuss what convention should be used in a new section.
– droll [chat] 02:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)I have copied this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Re: mountain elevation notation where, I hope, we can discuss the merits of different approaches. – droll [chat] 02:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
The parmeters latd, latm, lats, latNS, longd, longm, longs,
and longEW
are no longer documented. Please use the new parameter names. If you'd like to continue to use them then let's discuss it here. –
droll
[chat] 06:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please remove:
{{#if:{{{pushpin_map2|{{{map2|}}}}}}|[[Category:Infobox mountain using deprecated parameters]]}}
just before <noinclude>
. It is no longer needed. Thanks. –
droll
[chat] 06:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
The Template talk:Infobox mountain subpages have multiplied over time. I can't see how some of them are of any use currently. if there is no objection, then in the interest of tidiness I will request that these should be deleted:
They can all be recreated if needed. I don't think there is any thing useful in them now. Thanks. – droll [chat] 19:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just created Gray Peak (Antarctica), but I am having trouble with the infobox, specifically the locator map. The coordinates work fine, but when I add a locator map, it shows the map of Antarctica, but the location pin is generating an error message:
I have no idea what I am doing wrong. I've commented out the "map" field for the time being. Could someone please take a look at this for me, and tell me what's wrong? Thanks, kevyn ( talk) 08:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{ Infobox mountain/map/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. It fixes a bug. It should be noncontroversial.
Having a border around the map causes side effects. If caption
is assigned a value a border is created and the caption is placed within the border. If caption is not declared a border is generated. The only way to avoid a border is to declare it but assign it no value. –
droll
[chat] 03:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
This proposal should not be considered in the context of the discussion above. It is something I have been thinking about doing for awhile now and since User:Hike395 mentioned something like this above I went ahead and did some coding.
I wrote the current version of {{ Infobox protected area}} and it provides the follow options for the map field:
I've integrated the second option into {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox/map}} and added the necessary parameters to {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox}} and {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox/main}}. The K2 example at {{
Infobox mountain/testcases}} implements this option. Let map=test.ext
where text.ext
is any image file. The parameter is overloaded so to speak. The location of the marker is specified using map_x
and map_y
. where x,y is the pixel coordinates where the marker is to be displayed. To obtain the pixel address preview the infobox with the map image file and optionally the map size specified. Download the map image using the left click menu and then load it into a graphics program such as
Paint on Windows or
GIMP. Move the cursor to the desired location. I have not implement labels for this option as they are not available in {{
Superimpose}}.
I was experimenting with this some time ago and I seem to remember there is a small shift in the marker location when using Internet Explorer when compared with other browsers.
Before these changes are moved to the active template I would like to have a chance to discuss some other small changes I would like to see. I have some other things I need to take care of before I can get back here. Please do some beta tests for me if you have the chance. All suggestions are welcome.
I've also changed the font size of the map caption so that it conforms with the photo caption. This change will also prevent the caption from wrapping to the width of the map. The photo caption has never wrapped to the width of the photo.
I think we should retain the pixel option as many editors are familiar with that syntax. I'll work on it today.
– droll [chat] 20:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)map_height
is known. I'm not totally sold on this as it still requires some fussy work. I think we should keep it for the sake of completeness if nothing else. See the
Slieve Gallion test case for an example. Can anyone think of a better name for {{
Site plan}} (a.k.a {{
Lageplan}}). I though of {{
Superimpose%}}, {{
Superimpose percent}} and {{
Superimpose percentage}}. Another option would be to add the functionality to {{
Superimpose}} and invoke the option with a parameter like |percent=yes
. There might be a problem with inertia in getting it implemented.I'm going to ask around about the about the height problem but I'm not very hopeful.
– droll [chat]{{{map_height}}}
if I needed to use percentages. You're right: it does not really save much math if I have to know that. I'm sorry for the poor suggestion causing you a large amount of work --- I was just carried away with enthusiasm! —
hike395 (
talk) 07:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC){{ editprotected}}
Done Done by another editor -- ANowlin: talk 01:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Please copyc {{ Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} to {{ Infobox mountain/main}}. There is a bug in calling {{ Infobox coord}}: the parameters are switched. Today's update to {{ Infobox coord}} broke this. We should fix our bug in order to let work proceed at {{ Infobox coord}}.
Change was tested in the testcases. Thanks! — hike395 ( talk) 22:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Please copy {{ Infobox mountain/map/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. The changes are minor and will be transparent to users. The change has been tested. I cleaned an unnecessary case statement and prepared for a future version of the main template. – droll [chat] 15:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{
Infobox mountain/convert/sandbox}} into {{
Infobox mountain/convert}}. This will change the rounding of metres form 1 decimal place to 0. This was discussed and agreed to above. –
droll
[chat] 05:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe the version in the sandbox is now stable. The changes that were discussed are implemented. There are a few other changes that I don't think are controversial.
map_border
is no longer functional. It was never used and is buggy.coordinate_ref
does no wrap to the next line.photo_width
as an alternate name for photo_size
.map_width
as an alternate name for map_size
.coords
as an alternate name for coordinates
.coords_ref
as an alternate name for coordinates_ref
.other_name
from 95% to 110%. Name is 125%.I will work on the {{ Superimpose}} mapping method. The example in testcases is broken currently. I want to allow the geographical coordinates to display only in the title line. Currently, the use of lat_d and long_d forces the display of the coordinates in the table. This might be desirable when a grid reference is defined.
I hope everyone will look over the testcases and code before the active template is modified. I'm flexible. – droll [chat] 05:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
formed_by
parameter is used by {{
Infobox landform}} which is, currently, intended to be a sort of catch all for geological features that don't fit with any other infobox. It's like traversed
which is used in {{
Infobox mountain pass}}.See /main/testcases for a comparison of three sandboxes with different minimum widths. I would be happy with 25, 26 or 27 but would perfer 26 or 27.
The alternate name cell is displayed using different font sizes. I'd be happiest with 110%. It was 150% in the sandbox. I think it must have been a typo. I really missed on that one. The text in the name cell is 125% set in {{ infobox}}. – droll [chat] 02:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{
Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} into {{
Infobox mountain/main}}. It fixes a stray <p> in the HTML generated. –
droll
[chat] 04:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I propose that we move {{ Infobox mountain/main}} to {{ Infobox mountain}}, and {{ Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} to {{ Infobox mountain/sandbox}}. The outer template(s) currently serves no purpose: they translate deprecated parameters that User:Droll has helpfully entirely purged from WP.
Comments? Thoughts? — hike395 ( talk) 20:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be better to keep it for a while longer. See this diff. – droll [chat] 00:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I am now in favour of removing the outer template. The tracking category Category:Mountain articles requiring maintenance that was added in October for obsolete parameters does not contain any articles. I found one in there today but I fixed it. Whenever I checked it periodically since October I did not see any articles in it. RedWolf ( talk) 18:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok good. However, I too must now put a hold on this removal because there is the issue of {{ Infobox Berg}} which is being used by editors copying mountain articles from the German Wikipedia. I had a bit of discussion a while back with one of the editors using this alternate template and why they couldn't simply use this Infobox mountain. There is a section on my talk page about this back in April 2010. I think perhaps we could also have Infobox Berg call the /main template with perhaps a few mods needed to accommodate some of the extra information that the Berg template provides that the mountain template does not. As hike395 noted above, the /main template is also a called by the mountain pass infobox. So, I think at this point there are two items to consider. (1) Changing Infobox Berg to call the /main template and (2) removing some of the deprecated parameters from the outer template. As for having a new infobox for the mountain range, I think it's something to consider as I also agree with hike395 that the Geobox one just adds so much clutter (anti "less is more"). It would also allow us to have a watch list page as we do for mountains. RedWolf ( talk) 01:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
{{Infobox Berg}}
is exactly what has been done with {{
Infobox Burg}}. Basically, turn it into a template which calls this template, and can be cleanly substituted.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 03:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Cleveland Volcano (Alaska), the location map does not have a dot. Many Category:Volcanoes of Alaska with infobox mountain and location map do not have a dot. Any help? Please. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 05:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
There seems to be a bug in {{ Location map Alaska}}. Our infobox calls it with a negative (West) decimal longitude, which does not produce a mark:
However, if it gets called with a positive (East) decimal longitude, greater than 180, the mark shows up:
I'll report this at {{ Location map}} — hike395 ( talk) 06:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
For maps that cross the 180th meridian, the coding of Template:Location map only works correctly when called with DMS coordinates. When using such maps, that template does not properly display the marker when given a negative decimal longitude unless you also set lon_dir=W. It appears that User:Hike395 fixed that on 21 March 2010 by adding updates to Template:Infobox mountain/main (see [3]) and Template:Infobox mountain/map (see [4]). However, an edit to Template:Infobox mountain/map on 3 August 2010 (see [5]) removed the line that passed a value for lon_dir to Template:Location map. I believe this issue can be fixed by simply restoring the following line in Template:Infobox mountain/map:
| lon_dir = {{#if:{{{long_EW|}}}|{{{long_EW|}}}|{{#ifexpr:{{{long|0}}} < 0|W|E}} }}
-- Zyxw ( talk) 18:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Would it be possible to create a new sub type from Template:Infobox mountain for Island Volcano so as to be able to include parameters like "| area_km2 =", "| area_sqmi =" and "| area =" as well as others from template:infobox island? This would be useful for Mayor Island/Tuhua and ever so many others, see also Talk:Mayor Island/Tuhua#Duplication. Peter Horn User talk 22:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The coordinates seem to appear twice in the infoboxes in Talk:Mayor Island/Tuhua#Duplication & Mayor Island/Tuhua. May be it is a problem with my "Windows xp". Peter Horn User talk 22:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The source=
parameter is not documented. --
Stepheng3 (
talk) 21:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is this still the preferred template for mountains or has Geobox superseded it? -- Bermicourt ( talk) 18:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Infobox mountain/Archive 2 |
---|
Can we please add the following fields which are pertinent to mountains and which are used e.g. to distinguish independent mountains, hills, summits and subpeaks:
There is already a "prominence" field, but that only gives the height, not the name of the datum summit nor the name of the valley/saddle/wind gap between them.
A really neat and compact way of displaying this information using arrows is illustrated e.g. on German Wikipedia at de:Zugspitze where the fields are called Dominanz (= isolation) and Schartenhöhe (= prominence). -- Bermicourt ( talk) 19:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
There are currently several hundred articles that have overlapping coordinates displayed in the title bar, many of which are mountain articles. [6] [7] [8] The reason for this is that most location infoboxes (such as {{ Infobox settlement}}) only add coordinates to the infobox itself, and people use the {{ Coord}} template if they want to also display coordinates in the title bar. {{ Infobox mountain}}, however, defaults to displaying coordinates in both the infobox and the title bar. In my opinion this is problematic both because it is inconsistent with other infobox templates and because it is not intuitive that adding coordinate data to the infobox is also going to output coordinates to the titlebar.
I would like to suggest that we make the default behavior of Infobox mountain be to display coordinates just within the infobox, similar to Infobox settlement. This would mean changing the display parameter from "" to "inline". Thoughts? Kaldari ( talk) 23:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I would like to add the relief parameter which, when set with a non-blank value, would result in the relief/physical map to be displayed, if present in the relevant location map template (the image1 parameter indicates by convention, a relief/physical map). In the past, I had been creating separate location map templates that would display the relief map when I found one for a country/subdivision. Since the location map templates include support for the relief parameter (not sure when it was added), it should be a simply matter of passing the parameter on from the Infobox mountain template. I see from the {{ Infobox mountain/sandbox}} history that droll seemed to have been experimenting with adding the relief parameter along with a few other changes in June. Unsure of what other changes droll was looking at but adding support just for the relief parameter should be straightforward. As well, I am wondering if the infobox should default relief to 1/yes so that we don't have to go update all the articles ourselves. However, I am uncertain how intelligent the location map templates are with respect to setting relief=1 but the corresponding map has not been specified in the country/subdivision specific locator map template — if it doesn't find the relief map will it fallback to displaying the main map image? RedWolf ( talk) 18:26, 17 September 2011 (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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Can someone please lower the text size as in Template:Infobox Country? Thanks. ☆ CieloEstrellado 03:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
Please add the mark-up for an hCard microformat, per WP:UF, by adding:
class="vcard"
to the outer containerclass="fn org"
to the "Name"
table row.class="label"
to the td
containing {{{Location|}}}
.class="note"
to each of the rows for Elevation, Range, Prominence, Type, Volcanic Arc/Belt, Age, Last eruption and First ascent.Please also move the documentation, interwikis and categories to a /doc page, so that I can describe the above. Thank you. Andy Mabbett 12:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
Could we replace
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="label" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} {{{Location|}}}
with
|- class="adr" {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="region" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} {{{Location|}}}
It would put the location in the right microformat field (adress->region) rather than just a label. Thanks -- Qyd 21:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} class="adr" style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} <span class="region">{{{Location|}}}</span>
|- {{#if:{{{Location|}}}| {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; border-right:1px solid #999966; background:#e7dcc3;" {{!}} Location {{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966;" {{!}} <span class="adr"><span class="region">{{{Location|}}}</span></span>
would work just as well. -- Qyd 01:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I've updated the code to use wiki formatting; it's easier to read and doesn't require HTML comments. Additionally, I removed some redundant code (e.g., width:205px). The layout and usage should be identical. Cheers. -- MZMcBride 20:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}} Could the photo caption use a slightly smaller font?
by replacing:
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
with:
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; font-size:95%; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
or
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; font-size:smaller; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br />{{{Caption|}}}
or even
{{!}} style="border-top:1px solid #999966; text-align:center;" colspan="2" {{!}} [[Image:{{{Photo}}}|300px]]<br /><small>{{{Caption|}}}</small>
It would be closer to a standard image caption. Thanks. -- Qyd 17:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change the wikilink for the "Listing" row. Currently links to
Hill lists in the British Isles: please link to
Lists of mountains instead (to allow us to use listings in any country). Discussed at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Lists in Infobox. Thanks!
hike395 08:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible to add locator image functionality? Sometimes a picture of a mountain is not currently available but having locator image to the mountain is enough. For instance, in
Mount Leuser article. There is one example in
Template:Infobox Settlement which provides the functionality with pushpin_map
parameter. It would be good to have such feature in this template. —
Indon (
reply) — 09:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I was (over)bold and updated the visual look somewhat to reflect the design of other similar infoboxes. I hope I didn't screw anything up (well, I'm good at templates, but not exceptionally good). If I did, feel free to revert me (well, um, or call an administrator to do that through {{ editprotected}}). Duja ► 15:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Where was the discussion on adding a parent peak parameter? Mark J seems to have added it without any community discussion. RedWolf 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
The "Photo size" parameter seems to cause a problem if it exists but is empty. This is because the template places a pipe symbol after the image name with nothing between that and the closing square brackets. I think an "if" block is needed. -- Ozhiker ( talk) 10:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Per a request on my talk page, I've added a pushpin location map. It uses almost the same exact coding that is used at {{
Infobox Settlement}}. Any map that has been created for {{
location map}} can be used (e.g. Nepal or Colorado). New coordinate fields were also added to facilitate this and those coordinate fields must be used to make the map work correctly. All the new fields are:
|pushpin_map =<!-- the name of a location map as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Location_map --> |pushpin_label_position = <!-- the position of the pushpin label: left, right, top, bottom, none --> |pushpin_map_caption = |pushpin_mapsize = |coordinates_ref= |latd= |latm= |lats= |latNS= |longd= |longm= |longs= |longEW=
—
MJCdetroit
(yak) 18:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
See Mount Everest for an example. — MJCdetroit (yak) 18:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Could the default mark be changed from "Red pog2.svg" to something like "RedMountain.svg"? -- Waltloc ( talk) 20:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The attribute Parent_peak does not seem to display. Is that meant to be the case? imars ( talk) 11:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The documentation was not in sync with the implementation. The actual parameter name is "Parent peak". I have fixed the documentation. RedWolf ( talk) 06:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
What I'm trying to say is having the "parent peak" field titled "parent peak" means it's only used for original subsidiary peaks like Little Tahoma. But if you have a field titled "parent" it can mean the subsidiary peak of the parent peak (e.g. Little Tahoma is a subsidiary peak of Mount Rainier) or the subsidiary peak of a mountain feature like the Silverthrone Caldera. Such a field would make the "parent peak" field more useful and both have prominence. Black Tusk ( talk) 16:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Right. So is there still any need for the "parent peak" field to be renamed "parent"? I can't see any. — ras52 ( talk) 00:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
io:Shablono:Monto. Thank you, Joao Xavier ( talk) 20:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Will somebody please reverse this edit, as "label", rather than "adr-location", is the correct hCard microformat value for non-specific address data such as "Washington, USA" (seen in [1], for example). Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
(Moved text here from Template talk:Infobox mountain that got moved there without explaination. – droll [chat] 17:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC))
09-March-2010: There appears to be a limit to nesting templates and if-expressions which use Template:Convert, because of Convert's "19-nested subtemplates" issue. Some articles using Template:Infobox mountain were getting parser-errors for conversions of the type elevation={{convert|97|m|ft}} but NOT when adding precision "|0" which uses 3 fewer subtemplates to determine the precision rounding (avoiding templates Ordomag, Ordomag/x, etc.):
I fixed that parser-error problem by simplifying a 3-nested if-expression, inside the nested infobox Template:Infobox mountain/main. That 3-nested if-expression had been:
Which had the nesting logic as:
Instead, the new logic has moved "elevation" outside the nested-if:
With that change, then typical Convert worked for elevation={{convert|97|m|ft}}. Also, tests would work when bypassing the top-nested infobox, and instead calling the inner {{ Infobox mountain/main}} as one less level of template-nesting. However, we shouldn't request users to stop using nested infoboxes, so the quick fix is to avoid using Convert in 3-nested-if expressions inside nested infoboxes. Long term, we need to see if we could combine some of the "19-nested subtemplates" which Convert uses to compute {{convert|97|m|ft}}. - Wikid77 ( talk) 14:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I've modified {{ Infobox mountain/main}} to pass the coordinates_ref= parameter to {{ Infobox coord}}, in order that title coordinates can be properly footnoted. If this causes any problems, feel free to revert my change. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 04:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
Please change:
|listing={{{Listing|{{{listing|}}}}}}
to:
|listing=<span class="category">{{{Listing|{{{listing|}}}}}}</span>
and:
|range={{{Range|{{{range|}}}}}}
to:
|range=<span class="category">{{{Range|{{{range|}}}}}}</span>
in order to emit additional hCard microformat properties (see the microformat project for more info). Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Thats not a secret that some mounts are located on borders. So there was an edit war in Mount Kazbek. This template is protected. So I decided to create new template for mounts on borders. with using {{infobox mountain/main}}. Initially I used {{infobox mountain on border/main}}.
I think it would be better if we realize two maps showing in this template.-- Bouron ( talk) 12:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
My expanded view for those who didn't read the discussion.
If article Coca cola is in categories "drinks" and in category "non-alcogol drinks"=>we should delete one of these categories. But if it is in "drinks" and "products of Coca-Cola company" why we should delete one of them.
Now we have mount as part of country and as part of MR. You think we should ignore one of it. But we can ignore one of them if first category is part of second or second is part of first. Neither MR is part of the country, nor country is part of MR.
In one day I will make a propose of solution.-- Bouron ( talk) 10:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I have a proposed compromise, similar to what Bouron and imars are saying, above. In the past, I've wanted to add a specialized map that illustrates the location of a mountain (e.g., a cropped topo map from the Forest Service, for example). This sort of map is not a locator map: it has the location of the mountain already shown in the image. With the current infobox, I have to give up on showing a photograph of the mountain to show the specialized map.
Proposal: Add a new field, called "custom_map" that does not call {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. Instead, it would be similar to the photo field. It can have "custom_map_size" and "custom_map_caption". It can be used for mountains on borders of countries (per Bouron, above). It can also be used to show topo maps and mountains that have multiple peaks or that are part of long ridges.
What do other editors think? — hike395 ( talk) 14:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I propose such form of template.
What do you think?
I proposed just an idea of combining of maps. Don't take attention on technical realization. -- Bouron ( talk) 20:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
If there is no photo we can put range LM to the top. and leave country LM in section "location". I haven't realized that yet.-- Bouron ( talk) 20:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I've been pondering these changes for a long time. Most, I think, are noncontroversial. I believe the best way to go about this is list them here for 7 days and if there are no oppositions or if there is consensus I'll implement them. Please comment below each item or make general comments at the end of this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Droll ( talk • contribs) 10:02, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure something can be done about the age thing. I've been thinking of something similar as the solution to a problem I see. I up with dropping the debate on #4 and coming up with a link or something like that unless someone else wants to chip in. Best wishes.
– droll [chat] 07:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)The proposed end of the comment period is on Thursday. On Wednesday evening, I'll write a summery of what I think the consensus is. That will give one day for you tell me if I've missed something.
– droll [chat] 06:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)It appears that 1,2,3,7 and 8 should be implemented and that 4, 5 and 6 should be retained. Any last minute comments are welcome. I'll implement the code changes in the sandboxes and update the documentation tomorrow. The I'll let RedWolf know when its ready to be moved into the active template. Thanks all. – droll [chat] 04:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
My peeve, again: Rounding to a tenth of a meter is often wrong. A lot of summit elevations are known only within one contour interval, e.g. ±10 ft. Converting that to a figure purportedly accurate to ±5 cm gives a false precision. This goes doubly so for prominence, for which both elevations are seldom accurately surveyed. Rounding such figures to the nearest 5 meters would be best.
—WWoods (
talk) 18:56, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree that many summit elevations can only be determined by examination of a topographic map and that the contour enclosing the summit underestimates the elevation. In cases like this I always specify the elevation using the syntax elevation=(contour elevation)+ ft (floor of conversion)+ m)
(e.g. elevation=1,680+ ft (512+ m)
). This indicates (clearly I think) that the elevation is not well known. The British use a different method (e.g. elevation=c. 510 m (1,673 ft)). I have seen cases where editors add half the contour interval to the encircling contour. That, IMHO, is wrong.
Prominence is a different issue, IMHO. We use clean prominence which has a very clear definition. Clean prominence can be defined as the difference between the elevation of the higher contour nearest the saddle or the saddle elevation, if it is known, and the contour line which encircles the summit or the summit elevation, if it is known. There are two other ways to calculate prominence, namely: optimistic prominence and mean prominence. Calculating clean prominence results in a known value and there is no false precision possible. Also I believe it is in keeping with Wiki policy to use cited information when it is available. Doing our own prominence calculations when there are reliable sources is contrary to the spirit of that policy.
I would certainly like to know the opinions of others on this issue. I am prone to categorical statements I know but I'm not always right. I might be wrong about the floor thing. I think we had that discussion before too.
P.S. perhaps we could arrive at some guidelines that would help new editors.
– droll [chat] 22:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)As to the prominence thing, I've been thinking about it and I think the advice I gave about is correct.
When the elevation is interpolated from a topo map and no elevation is given then the precision should not be over stated. It should be the elevation of the closed contour, IMHO. Maybe we can discuss what convention should be used in a new section.
– droll [chat] 02:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)I have copied this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Re: mountain elevation notation where, I hope, we can discuss the merits of different approaches. – droll [chat] 02:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
The parmeters latd, latm, lats, latNS, longd, longm, longs,
and longEW
are no longer documented. Please use the new parameter names. If you'd like to continue to use them then let's discuss it here. –
droll
[chat] 06:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please remove:
{{#if:{{{pushpin_map2|{{{map2|}}}}}}|[[Category:Infobox mountain using deprecated parameters]]}}
just before <noinclude>
. It is no longer needed. Thanks. –
droll
[chat] 06:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
The Template talk:Infobox mountain subpages have multiplied over time. I can't see how some of them are of any use currently. if there is no objection, then in the interest of tidiness I will request that these should be deleted:
They can all be recreated if needed. I don't think there is any thing useful in them now. Thanks. – droll [chat] 19:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just created Gray Peak (Antarctica), but I am having trouble with the infobox, specifically the locator map. The coordinates work fine, but when I add a locator map, it shows the map of Antarctica, but the location pin is generating an error message:
I have no idea what I am doing wrong. I've commented out the "map" field for the time being. Could someone please take a look at this for me, and tell me what's wrong? Thanks, kevyn ( talk) 08:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{ Infobox mountain/map/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. It fixes a bug. It should be noncontroversial.
Having a border around the map causes side effects. If caption
is assigned a value a border is created and the caption is placed within the border. If caption is not declared a border is generated. The only way to avoid a border is to declare it but assign it no value. –
droll
[chat] 03:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
This proposal should not be considered in the context of the discussion above. It is something I have been thinking about doing for awhile now and since User:Hike395 mentioned something like this above I went ahead and did some coding.
I wrote the current version of {{ Infobox protected area}} and it provides the follow options for the map field:
I've integrated the second option into {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox/map}} and added the necessary parameters to {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox}} and {{
Infobox mountain/sandbox/main}}. The K2 example at {{
Infobox mountain/testcases}} implements this option. Let map=test.ext
where text.ext
is any image file. The parameter is overloaded so to speak. The location of the marker is specified using map_x
and map_y
. where x,y is the pixel coordinates where the marker is to be displayed. To obtain the pixel address preview the infobox with the map image file and optionally the map size specified. Download the map image using the left click menu and then load it into a graphics program such as
Paint on Windows or
GIMP. Move the cursor to the desired location. I have not implement labels for this option as they are not available in {{
Superimpose}}.
I was experimenting with this some time ago and I seem to remember there is a small shift in the marker location when using Internet Explorer when compared with other browsers.
Before these changes are moved to the active template I would like to have a chance to discuss some other small changes I would like to see. I have some other things I need to take care of before I can get back here. Please do some beta tests for me if you have the chance. All suggestions are welcome.
I've also changed the font size of the map caption so that it conforms with the photo caption. This change will also prevent the caption from wrapping to the width of the map. The photo caption has never wrapped to the width of the photo.
I think we should retain the pixel option as many editors are familiar with that syntax. I'll work on it today.
– droll [chat] 20:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)map_height
is known. I'm not totally sold on this as it still requires some fussy work. I think we should keep it for the sake of completeness if nothing else. See the
Slieve Gallion test case for an example. Can anyone think of a better name for {{
Site plan}} (a.k.a {{
Lageplan}}). I though of {{
Superimpose%}}, {{
Superimpose percent}} and {{
Superimpose percentage}}. Another option would be to add the functionality to {{
Superimpose}} and invoke the option with a parameter like |percent=yes
. There might be a problem with inertia in getting it implemented.I'm going to ask around about the about the height problem but I'm not very hopeful.
– droll [chat]{{{map_height}}}
if I needed to use percentages. You're right: it does not really save much math if I have to know that. I'm sorry for the poor suggestion causing you a large amount of work --- I was just carried away with enthusiasm! —
hike395 (
talk) 07:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC){{ editprotected}}
Done Done by another editor -- ANowlin: talk 01:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Please copyc {{ Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} to {{ Infobox mountain/main}}. There is a bug in calling {{ Infobox coord}}: the parameters are switched. Today's update to {{ Infobox coord}} broke this. We should fix our bug in order to let work proceed at {{ Infobox coord}}.
Change was tested in the testcases. Thanks! — hike395 ( talk) 22:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Please copy {{ Infobox mountain/map/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox mountain/map}}. The changes are minor and will be transparent to users. The change has been tested. I cleaned an unnecessary case statement and prepared for a future version of the main template. – droll [chat] 15:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{
Infobox mountain/convert/sandbox}} into {{
Infobox mountain/convert}}. This will change the rounding of metres form 1 decimal place to 0. This was discussed and agreed to above. –
droll
[chat] 05:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe the version in the sandbox is now stable. The changes that were discussed are implemented. There are a few other changes that I don't think are controversial.
map_border
is no longer functional. It was never used and is buggy.coordinate_ref
does no wrap to the next line.photo_width
as an alternate name for photo_size
.map_width
as an alternate name for map_size
.coords
as an alternate name for coordinates
.coords_ref
as an alternate name for coordinates_ref
.other_name
from 95% to 110%. Name is 125%.I will work on the {{ Superimpose}} mapping method. The example in testcases is broken currently. I want to allow the geographical coordinates to display only in the title line. Currently, the use of lat_d and long_d forces the display of the coordinates in the table. This might be desirable when a grid reference is defined.
I hope everyone will look over the testcases and code before the active template is modified. I'm flexible. – droll [chat] 05:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
formed_by
parameter is used by {{
Infobox landform}} which is, currently, intended to be a sort of catch all for geological features that don't fit with any other infobox. It's like traversed
which is used in {{
Infobox mountain pass}}.See /main/testcases for a comparison of three sandboxes with different minimum widths. I would be happy with 25, 26 or 27 but would perfer 26 or 27.
The alternate name cell is displayed using different font sizes. I'd be happiest with 110%. It was 150% in the sandbox. I think it must have been a typo. I really missed on that one. The text in the name cell is 125% set in {{ infobox}}. – droll [chat] 02:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please copy {{
Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} into {{
Infobox mountain/main}}. It fixes a stray <p> in the HTML generated. –
droll
[chat] 04:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I propose that we move {{ Infobox mountain/main}} to {{ Infobox mountain}}, and {{ Infobox mountain/main/sandbox}} to {{ Infobox mountain/sandbox}}. The outer template(s) currently serves no purpose: they translate deprecated parameters that User:Droll has helpfully entirely purged from WP.
Comments? Thoughts? — hike395 ( talk) 20:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be better to keep it for a while longer. See this diff. – droll [chat] 00:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I am now in favour of removing the outer template. The tracking category Category:Mountain articles requiring maintenance that was added in October for obsolete parameters does not contain any articles. I found one in there today but I fixed it. Whenever I checked it periodically since October I did not see any articles in it. RedWolf ( talk) 18:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok good. However, I too must now put a hold on this removal because there is the issue of {{ Infobox Berg}} which is being used by editors copying mountain articles from the German Wikipedia. I had a bit of discussion a while back with one of the editors using this alternate template and why they couldn't simply use this Infobox mountain. There is a section on my talk page about this back in April 2010. I think perhaps we could also have Infobox Berg call the /main template with perhaps a few mods needed to accommodate some of the extra information that the Berg template provides that the mountain template does not. As hike395 noted above, the /main template is also a called by the mountain pass infobox. So, I think at this point there are two items to consider. (1) Changing Infobox Berg to call the /main template and (2) removing some of the deprecated parameters from the outer template. As for having a new infobox for the mountain range, I think it's something to consider as I also agree with hike395 that the Geobox one just adds so much clutter (anti "less is more"). It would also allow us to have a watch list page as we do for mountains. RedWolf ( talk) 01:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
{{Infobox Berg}}
is exactly what has been done with {{
Infobox Burg}}. Basically, turn it into a template which calls this template, and can be cleanly substituted.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 03:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Cleveland Volcano (Alaska), the location map does not have a dot. Many Category:Volcanoes of Alaska with infobox mountain and location map do not have a dot. Any help? Please. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 05:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
There seems to be a bug in {{ Location map Alaska}}. Our infobox calls it with a negative (West) decimal longitude, which does not produce a mark:
However, if it gets called with a positive (East) decimal longitude, greater than 180, the mark shows up:
I'll report this at {{ Location map}} — hike395 ( talk) 06:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
For maps that cross the 180th meridian, the coding of Template:Location map only works correctly when called with DMS coordinates. When using such maps, that template does not properly display the marker when given a negative decimal longitude unless you also set lon_dir=W. It appears that User:Hike395 fixed that on 21 March 2010 by adding updates to Template:Infobox mountain/main (see [3]) and Template:Infobox mountain/map (see [4]). However, an edit to Template:Infobox mountain/map on 3 August 2010 (see [5]) removed the line that passed a value for lon_dir to Template:Location map. I believe this issue can be fixed by simply restoring the following line in Template:Infobox mountain/map:
| lon_dir = {{#if:{{{long_EW|}}}|{{{long_EW|}}}|{{#ifexpr:{{{long|0}}} < 0|W|E}} }}
-- Zyxw ( talk) 18:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Would it be possible to create a new sub type from Template:Infobox mountain for Island Volcano so as to be able to include parameters like "| area_km2 =", "| area_sqmi =" and "| area =" as well as others from template:infobox island? This would be useful for Mayor Island/Tuhua and ever so many others, see also Talk:Mayor Island/Tuhua#Duplication. Peter Horn User talk 22:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The coordinates seem to appear twice in the infoboxes in Talk:Mayor Island/Tuhua#Duplication & Mayor Island/Tuhua. May be it is a problem with my "Windows xp". Peter Horn User talk 22:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The source=
parameter is not documented. --
Stepheng3 (
talk) 21:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is this still the preferred template for mountains or has Geobox superseded it? -- Bermicourt ( talk) 18:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Infobox mountain/Archive 2 |
---|
Can we please add the following fields which are pertinent to mountains and which are used e.g. to distinguish independent mountains, hills, summits and subpeaks:
There is already a "prominence" field, but that only gives the height, not the name of the datum summit nor the name of the valley/saddle/wind gap between them.
A really neat and compact way of displaying this information using arrows is illustrated e.g. on German Wikipedia at de:Zugspitze where the fields are called Dominanz (= isolation) and Schartenhöhe (= prominence). -- Bermicourt ( talk) 19:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
There are currently several hundred articles that have overlapping coordinates displayed in the title bar, many of which are mountain articles. [6] [7] [8] The reason for this is that most location infoboxes (such as {{ Infobox settlement}}) only add coordinates to the infobox itself, and people use the {{ Coord}} template if they want to also display coordinates in the title bar. {{ Infobox mountain}}, however, defaults to displaying coordinates in both the infobox and the title bar. In my opinion this is problematic both because it is inconsistent with other infobox templates and because it is not intuitive that adding coordinate data to the infobox is also going to output coordinates to the titlebar.
I would like to suggest that we make the default behavior of Infobox mountain be to display coordinates just within the infobox, similar to Infobox settlement. This would mean changing the display parameter from "" to "inline". Thoughts? Kaldari ( talk) 23:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I would like to add the relief parameter which, when set with a non-blank value, would result in the relief/physical map to be displayed, if present in the relevant location map template (the image1 parameter indicates by convention, a relief/physical map). In the past, I had been creating separate location map templates that would display the relief map when I found one for a country/subdivision. Since the location map templates include support for the relief parameter (not sure when it was added), it should be a simply matter of passing the parameter on from the Infobox mountain template. I see from the {{ Infobox mountain/sandbox}} history that droll seemed to have been experimenting with adding the relief parameter along with a few other changes in June. Unsure of what other changes droll was looking at but adding support just for the relief parameter should be straightforward. As well, I am wondering if the infobox should default relief to 1/yes so that we don't have to go update all the articles ourselves. However, I am uncertain how intelligent the location map templates are with respect to setting relief=1 but the corresponding map has not been specified in the country/subdivision specific locator map template — if it doesn't find the relief map will it fallback to displaying the main map image? RedWolf ( talk) 18:26, 17 September 2011 (UTC)