Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization/Completed proposals

The following are completed proposals from within Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. They are moved here after a proposal has passed or not received enough votes and stored for archive purposes.

(APPROVED: Closed 30 July 2006) Proposal: Color change for Template:s-dip

Alright, this is the last of three proposals to change some of the header colors. The following is the original color for s-dip and my proposal for a different color, keeping it within the same pink lines:

Diplomatic posts

And for the proposal:

Diplomatic posts

You may either vote on this or propose an alternative to the color I choose. I picked a lighter one to appease the brightness censors.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 20:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve – Whaleyland

This is good Atropos 00:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be a little brighter...this color is hard to see. It's better than the original overly bright color, but not by much. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 16:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve. Alkari (?) 23:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about this one? It's a little darker than the alternative, but retains the tincture.

Diplomatic posts

Approve - Waltham

Approve --Tim4christ17 ^talk 08:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve. Alkari (?) 20:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's the best one. Atropos 05:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support: This one definitely fits the best.—Whaleyland

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal Approved: The proposal to change the color of the header Template:s-dip to FACEFF has been approved and an admin has been notified of the approved proposal. The discussion for this proposal has been moved here for archive purposes. Thank you to everyone who voted.

(APPROVED: Closed 24 July 2007) Proposal: Template:s-par remove the parameter la (Local assembly) from the parameter list

Do you think we should remove the la parameter? We do not really need it; it is too general, and our parliamentary headers are normally very specific (not to mention the usually low importance of local assemblies).

Approve – Waltham, The Duke of 14:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve – la is just a parameter waiting to have problems.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve per Waltham and Whaleyland; furthermore, LA is the ISO 3166 code for Laos and thus shouldn't be used for "local assembly". Alkari (?) 23:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've put an edit request to delete this parameter has per the reasons Alkari noted. Despite the discussion, I believe this problem overpowers anything else. I will also remove the headers for any page currently using the la parameter so they will not end up with blank headers.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal Approved: The proposal to remove the parameter la from Template:s-par passed and has been enacted. All instances of that parameter have been removed or redirected. The discussion for this proposal has been moved here for archive purposes. Thank you to everyone who voted.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(APPROVED: Closed 23 July 2007) Proposal: Template:s-pol merged into Template:s-civ

As police appointments are relatively few, and probably too few to warrant their own template, Whaleyland and myself have decided that it is better to substitute it with s-civ ("Civic offices"), a template with parameters for police, fire, and medical appointments. As these three categories of offices are related to each other and none of them is large enough to warrant its own header, we believe the change is a sound one.

However, in order to convert all instances of s-pol to s-civ|pol there is no other way than to do it by hand or by bot – redirects will not work for specific parameters. A clear consensus is necessary for the task request to be accepted in Bot Requests, however, so I would like to hear your opinion. Waltham, The Duke of 12:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I myself support the conversion. Waltham, The Duke of

Support: After adding in a #default parameter, I believe this will be a good replacement for a small title.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions )

Support; this change seems logical and sensible. Alkari (?) 21:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - makes sense. Any idea how many of them there are, though? If there aren't too many I could do a run with AWB. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 11:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are 114 pages that would need to be changed.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 19:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put AWB on it right away. It seems pretty clear that we've got consensus for the change. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 16:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done :)
Note that the actual merger/redirect of {{s-pol}} will still have to be completed and any relevant documentation changed. But the transclusions have been changed to {{s-civ|pol}} --Tim4christ17 ^talk 03:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal Approved: The proposal to move all instances of Template:s-pol to Template:s-civ using the |pol parameter has been approved. All transclusions have been redirected to the appropriate template and a deletion request is pending for the removal of s-pol. The discussion for this proposal has been moved here for archive purposes. Thank you to everyone who voted.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(APPROVED: Closed 16 July 2006) Proposal: Template:s-par change upr and lwr to sen and hs for United States headers

Since few, if any, people are using the new s-par parameters yet for US states and territories, we may want to work out a solution to that discussion now, before reversion becomes impossible. Currently, it would take virtually no work to replace all the instances of upr and lwr in s-par to sen and hs. Three clicks in MS Word find and replace, and then just repaste it to the page (pending admin approval). But if we are going to change it, we need to do so soon. I somewhat agree with Tim4Christ17, although I do always like the transnationalness of this project (despite the abundance of Britishness about it, lol).

Proposal: Template:s-par change of US state and territorial legislatures from upr and lwr to sen and hs. Vote!

Approve
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 06:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak approval—I grudgingly accept the confusion that upr and lwr may create in the United States. However, these may work better for Westminster system and European parliaments. Waltham, The Duke of 16:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve - clarity is paramount. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 19:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing no further comment, I've put an editprotected request at {{s-par}} --Tim4christ17 ^talk 10:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing an apparent objection from Waltham here, let's revisit this.
Proposal: Template:s-par change as above, specifying that legislatures that are "assemblies" rather than "houses" or "senates" use the "asy" parameter. Same logic as above - reduce confusion while enhancing accuracy and retaining standardization. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 20:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve --Tim4christ17 ^talk 20:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove – it will not retain standardisation to use an asy parameter for the no more than six lower houses that are called "Assembly"; on the contrary, it will make the scheme more confused and look like there are more than two types of houses in bicameral legislatures, which is even more confusing. Waltham, The Duke of 14:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove – Using hs is much better than asy as per Waltham.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 00:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal Approved: The initial proposal to replace all cases of upr and lwr to sen and hs within United States legislative headers passed and was implemented. The discussion for this proposal has been moved here for archive purposes. Thank you to everyone who voted.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(APPROVED: Closed 12 July 2007) Proposal: Additional Parameter in Template:s-bef and Template:s-aft

Proposal: As per a request I received some weeks ago from the individual responsible for all the double headers and screwy succession boxes throughout the French pages, I promised I would propose this revision to s-bef and s-aft. This small edit would allow title changes to be added in a preset format within the s-bef and s-aft templates as in the example below:

Preceded by Napoleon I	King of France and Navarre 6 April 1814 – 20 March 1815	Succeeded by Napoleon I

to

Preceded by Napoleon I as Emperor of France	King of France and Navarre 6 April 1814 – 20 March 1815	Succeeded by Napoleon I as Emperor of France

The later case uses an optional parameter, "as", added in after the name of the predecessor or successor thus allowing one to place title changes without having to resort to breaking up the template's code flow internally (adding lots of breaks and style additions and subtractions).

Give me your votes!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 17:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve: I think this will standardize change of title fields across wikipages more smoothly than the current format.–Whaleyland
Strong approve; this should greatly aid consistency and ease of use. Alkari (?) 22:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Approve: I like efforts to replace that sort of bodged-in text with parameters. Choess 17:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly approve: this will better "enforce" the guidelines for name changes and will make it easier for new editors to create succession boxes with the correct format for content (and will help to completely eliminate those odd cases of double successor cells). Waltham, The Duke of 09:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Excellent idea. Get more info into less screen space without hardcoded hacks and kludges. — MrDolomite • Talk 11:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal APPROVED: This discussion has been closed and the proposal has passed with a unanimous vote from the current active members. I have notified the administrators of the passed proposal and am currently pending the replacement of the current source code with the new code.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 21:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(FAILED: Closed 11 Jul. 2007) Proposal: Wider succession boxes

A proposal has been forwarded by User:Fabartus to expand the size of succession boxes from the current standard, which is based on a 30-40-30 percentage rate with no relevance to the actual page width to a mandatory 100 percent width, that would appear in most cases as a full page span consistent with that of Navigation templates that often follow a succession box. The following are examples of that template in action routed through a test template found at User:KuatofKDY/Template:s-start.

Original {{s-start}} (simple)

Preceded by Athelstan	King of England 939–946	Succeeded by Edred

Proposed {{s-start}} (simple)

Preceded by Athelstan	King of England 939–946	Succeeded by Edred

Original {{s-start}} (standard)

Regnal titles
Hirohito Imperial House of Japan Born: April 29 1901 Died: January 7 1989
Preceded by Emperor Taishō (Yoshihito)	Emperor of Japan December 25, 1926 – January 7, 1989	Succeeded by Akihito present emperor

Proposed {{s-start}} (standard)

Regnal titles
Hirohito Imperial House of Japan Born: April 29 1901 Died: January 7 1989
Preceded by Emperor Taishō (Yoshihito)	Emperor of Japan December 25, 1926 – January 7, 1989	Succeeded by Akihito present emperor

Original {{s-start}} (advanced, with Navigation box)

Regnal titles
Henry VIII of England House of Tudor Born: June 28 1491 Died: January 28 1547
Preceded by Henry VII	King of England April 22 1509 – January 28 1547	Succeeded by Edward VI
Preceded by Henry VII	Lord of Ireland 1509 – 1541	Declared king by an act of the Irish Parliament
Vacant Title last held by Edward Bruce	King of Ireland 1541 – 1547	Succeeded by Edward VI
Peerage of England
New title	Duke of York 1494 – 1509	Merged in crown
Preceded by Arthur	Prince of Wales 1502–1509	Vacant Title next held by Edward VI
Political offices
Preceded by Sir William Scott	Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports 1493 – 1509	Succeeded by Sir Edward Poyning

Proposed {{s-start}} (advanced, with Navigation box)

Regnal titles
Henry VIII of England House of Tudor Born: June 28 1491 Died: January 28 1547
Preceded by Henry VII	King of England April 22 1509 – January 28 1547	Succeeded by Edward VI
Preceded by Henry VII	Lord of Ireland 1509 – 1541	Declared king by an act of the Irish Parliament
Vacant Title last held by Edward Bruce	King of Ireland 1541 – 1547	Succeeded by Edward VI
Peerage of England
New title	Duke of York 1494 – 1509	Merged in crown
Preceded by Arthur	Prince of Wales 1502–1509	Vacant Title next held by Edward VI
Political offices
Preceded by Sir William Scott	Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports 1493 – 1509	Succeeded by Sir Edward Poyning

If approved, this template change will be implemented into Template:s-start and effect all templates that currently use {{s-start}}, {{start}}, or {{start box}}. Let the voting begin! (A copy of this proposal is also located at Template_talk:s-start.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 08:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve! – This change will make the template more consistent across Wikipedia articles and allow for some more space to write before a break is required in a succession box template.

Strong approval – This change will:

Make succession boxes more consistent
Utilise the space now lost at both sides of succession boxes
Reduce the impression of crammed succession boxes
Make large successions shorter

And can someone please fix this page? It is ridiculously wide. Waltham, The Duke of 11:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove. I don't find the proposed change very aesthetically pleasing, and I don't see that it would provide any great benefit. Since the boxes automatically expand to fit their contents, the only space being "lost" is that which wouldn't be used anyway. Likewise, the boxes already make themselves as wide (horizontally) as necessary, and therefore as short (vertically) as possible, so this change wouldn't make long successions shorter than they already are. Alkari (?) 22:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, they are as wide as is necessary for the words to fit inside, and therefore some of the cells will look crammed by definition. However, a little more space would make them look brighter and better in appearance. Waltham, The Duke of 13:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove. As Alkari stated, there's no "lost" space. Additionally, it's useful to have succession boxes with a different width than other templates, to make it easier to scroll to - or past - a succession box when looking for information. --Tim4christ17 ^talk 23:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does a narrower template make scrolling easier? And if you are referring to distinguishing them by appearance, I would say succession boxes have a distinctive enough look. Waltham, The Duke of 13:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't bother me either way, but when the move from the "rail line" to the "s-rail" template was mention, one of the reasons the UK railways WikiProject said no (the Americans and the tube embraced it) was some editors didn't like that look. Thus the change risks ruffling feathers on a global scale without achieving any greater usability. Pickle 14:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove for the reasons articulated by Alkari and Tim4christ17. Mackensen (talk) 12:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve! – This change will make the template more consistent across Wikipedia articles and allow for some more space to write before a break is required in a succession box template.

Strong approval – I have already stated the reasons for my support in this section of this very page. Waltham, The Duke of 11:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approve. This seems like a good idea. john k 18:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disapprove. I don't find the proposed change very aesthetically pleasing, and I don't see that it would provide any great benefit. Alkari (?) 22:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VOTING CLOSED: Proposal NOT Approved: I have closed voting on this proposal and labeled it as a failed proposal. While it seems some members wanted the more consistent look of this template change proposal, it seems others have noted that the change may damage other templates that WP:SBS does not monitor. On those grounds, I have closed this debate. The discussion has been archived at Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization/Failed proposals where it will remain indefinitely. Thank you to everyone who voted and keep at it!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 21:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]