Template talk:Infobox writer

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox writer template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10: 6 months

Template:Infobox writer is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

This template was considered for merging with Template:Infobox person on 17 December 2011. The result of the discussion was "no consensus to merge at this time; some support for refactoring {{Infobox writer}} so that it internally calls {{Infobox person}}".

How to handle multiple authors in a shared article?

Is there a standardized way to handle a joint article? Take, for example, John and Elizabeth Sherrill. I'd like to add their birth and death dates, but I'm not able to use more than one module and would have to resort to something like |module= {{plainlist| *{{infobox person}} *{{infobox person}} }}. Snowman304|talk 18:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 14 August 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

To any administrator, apply my edit to this infobox's sandbox: replace font-size: 125% in |abovestyle= with {{{abovestyle|}}}. Santiago Claudio (talk) 04:28, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain the purpose of this edit. Also, I have removed the setting in the edit request saying that this is an edit request for Template:Infobox officeholder rather than Template:Infobox writer. SilverLocust 💬 10:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request is for consistency with |abovestyle= in Template:Infobox person. Santiago Claudio (talk) 02:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should the default be left at 125% though, to preserve current behaviour? Also there are other changes in the sandbox with the image and caption fields. Are these also requested? If not, please can you resync the sandbox and then apply your change again? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done pending a response * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, change default to {{{abovestyle|}}}. No other changes in the sandbox; I didn't request them. I already synced the sandbox; again, there were no errors. Santiago Claudio (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't errors, but unexpected changes in the current sandbox diff (you should see a link to it in the edit request banner). To resync means to copy wikitext from Template:Infobox writer to Template:Infobox writer/sandbox and then do the requested changes in the sandbox. —⁠andrybak (talk) 08:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already synced! Santiago Claudio (talk) 09:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which test case contains a demonstration of |abovestyle=? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Test case 1. Santiago Claudio (talk) 01:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

|abovestyle= is not in that test case. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

education

What is |education= used for? The description field is blank. Are we listing K-12 schools? -- GreenC 16:28, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same question was asked Template_talk:Infobox_writer/Archive_6#Nationality_and_citizenship in July 2010, no answer provided. Someone said the field was discussed in January 2009 but there is no evidence of that. It does appear this field was never discussed, concerns have been raised over the years. --GreenC 16:34, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found MOS:INFOEDU. Updated the docs: Special:Diff/1170380505/1273285054 -- GreenC 16:39, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - Native name description

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The description for the Native name field says "Name of the writer in his native languages(s)." It should say "Name of the writer in their native language(s)."

flod logic (talk) 18:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed – editor flod logic, next time you might want to try this yourself, as this edit was made to the template data on the unprotected /doc page. A little tricky sometimes, so some care is advised. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 10:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - add template:Website defunct to "website" parameter

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Would you please add template:Website defunct to the to "website" parameter, so it is allowed in addition to template:URL? As this infobox currently functions, use of the template:Website defunct triggers the Category:Biography template using bare URL in website parameter. Adding template:Website defunct to the expected items in this infobox's "website" parameter would probably solve the problem. Lois Duncan is an example of an article where this is an issue. For more on the parameter, see: Template talk:Infobox writer/Archive 9#Website parameter. - tucoxn\^talk 13:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the easiest way to fix this would be to make {{Website defunct}} wrap {{URL}}, which does not need a template editor - the check is based on the processed output after expanding templates (does it start with a [ or a <), so that should just work. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Thanks for the reply. I tried to do this at the top of my messy sandbox but my solution is not quite correct. This is probably because there isn't a parameter in {{URL}} to disallow the the link to be clickable. (We don't want people trying to click on defunct URLs.) Is this something you can help fix? Thanks! - tucoxn\^talk 10:39, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]