{{ Taxonbar}} ( talk history links # /subpages /doc /doc edit /sbox /sbox diff /test)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Taxonbar template. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, all sub-template talk pages of {{ Taxonbar}} and Module:Taxonbar redirect here. |
Template:Taxonbar 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 does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I happened to notice that a page with the taxonbar commented out didn't appear in Category:Taxobox articles missing a taxonbar. Looking at Module:Taxonbar/exists and Module:Template redirect regex, I can see why not. I don't think there's any obvious fix, but this search finds pages where taxonbars have been commented out. Of course, those pages may also have taxonbars that are not commented out.
I have uncommented many examples. [1]
<!--
for some reason... Can anyone help? See line 17 & 20 there, and
Template:Taxonbar/exists/testcases/true#True. ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf)
14:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
local v_cmt_before = '%<%!%-%-%s*%{%{'..v
? —
Jts1882 |
talk
14:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
<!--{{Taxonbar}}-->
for simplicity, and braces don't need escaping in Lua (since generalized finite quantifiers {n,m}
don't exist in this implementation). Regardless, I found the problem. I was using .baseText
for the pagename
, so the regex was running on
Template:Taxonbar/exists/testcases instead of the intended
Template:Taxonbar/exists/testcases/true... Shouldn't be a problem to implement now...! ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf)
14:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)This topic has come upon a number of occasions, most recently at
WT:Automated_taxobox_system#Automatic links to species, commons, data. Taxonbar uses Navbox and for some reason this is disabled on mobile. Anything using class="navbox"
is removed server side, although the templatestyles are still on the page.
Last year I did some experiments on alternative outputs for taxonbar information, bypassing Navbox, and also using taxonbar to output sitelinks. I've restored these options to Module:Taxonbar/sandbox and placed the examples in User:Jts1882/taxonbar. I was trying to work out what works on mobile and what doesn't and surprisingly all the collapsible options worked. More surprisingly the taxonbars worked (I've since seen the taxonbar documentation and testcases show taxonbars on mobile). Navbox is only blocked in mainspace, not template of user space.
Anyway, the reason for this topic is I've created prototype output in Navbox style that works on mobile:
{{Taxonbar/sandbox|from=Q11847339|from2=Q593398|format=pseudo-taxonbar}}
{{Taxonbar|from=Q11847339|from2=Q593398}}
To test on mobile you can copy the code above and preview it on the
Indian_flying_frog page.
I'm uncertain if this should be implemented. There is a reason Navbox is blocked and this might be considered an attempt to bypass a Wikipedia policy. My suspicion is that big nested Navboxes are the problem and a small simple table like the taxonbar doesn't cause the same issues. — Jts1882 | talk 12:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
<div>
based output. A problem here is aligning the left hand column without using a fixed width and getting the floating elements right. I found a neater method using display:grid
which I've implemented using templatestyles.
{{Taxonbar/sandbox|from=Q11847339|from2=Q593398|format=grid-taxonbar}}
{{Taxonbar|from=Q11847339|from2=Q593398}}
@ Jts1882 and Tom.Reding: (or anyone...) I'm being told on my WD talk that our use of nomenclatural type of (Q116044186) is incorrect. I'm not sure whether they are saying we should be using nomenclatural type (Q116538381) or do something else. Can y'all jump in and help straighten this out? - UtherSRG (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
|monotypic_parentN=x
and |monotypic_childN=x
where N is a number (we may have multiple monotypic taxa in one article, so N number of parent/child relationships) and x indicates which fromN
field fills this role. For instance: {{Taxonbar|from1=Q123|from2=Q456|monotypic_parent1=1|monotypic_child1=2}}
would indicate from1 & from2 form a monotypy, with from1 being the parent and from2 being the child.checking that monotypic genus has a taxonomic type (P427) that is a taxon name and has a parent matching the monotypic genus will pick up some species of monotypic genera. It won't when there are new combinations.- UtherSRG (talk) 14:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Jts1882: I remain concerned over Wikidata's neutrality on taxonomy. Just to take an example I've been working on recently, according to some sources Chrysogonum is monotypic with one species, Chrysogonum virginianum, as this version of the article said. But other sources have 1 to 3 North American species and in the case of PoWO another 4 Madagascan species. The Wikidata item should allow the taxon name to be declared both monotypic according to given sources and non-monotypic according to others, just as it allows a taxon name to have multiple parent taxa. Peter coxhead ( talk) 10:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)