Template talk:Don't edit this line

November–December 2010 discussion explaining the rationale for creation of this template

See Template talk:Automatic taxobox/Archive 6 § Editing assistance – Wbm1058 (talk) 10:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Loop error

This template is causing a loop error at {{taxonomy/Permoplecoptera}}. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Name

Not good. Rich Farmbrough, 20:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC).

I must agree with Rich.... it's highly tempting, but undescriptive. The same could be accomplished with <!--DON'T EDIT THIS LINE-->Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

• Agree 6 years later: I have worked, for years, on improving the Taxobox templates, and have deduced a better name would be "Template:Access_taxon" because the template works as an "accessor function" (setter/getter) to set or get data items from inside a taxon template of form "Template:Taxonomy/...". We have found that users only rarely hack the name inside template calls, and hence there is no reason for the extra warning, "Don't edit this line" (even if a comment) because users instead typically focus on editing the parameters inside the template-call. The related templates would then be renamed, with "Template:Don't edit this line rank" to be renamed as "Template:Access_taxon_rank" (etc.) -Wikid77 (talk) 15:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

@Wikid77: I certainly agree that the name is poor. You say above that it works as a "setter/getter", but it doesn't change the values in a taxonomy template, only gets them. So perhaps "Get taxon" would be a better name? Peter coxhead (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

This template is redundant?

Related December 2012 discussion: "The next taxobox depth problem is related to 410 taxonomy templates with the taxonomy/key subtemplates, which can wait a few more weeks to be reduced. -Wikid77 (talk) 20:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)"

@Smith609: Noting this 5-year-old diff says, "This template should now be redundant to the more-efficient "don't edit this line {{{machine code}}}" variants.", does that mean that this template should be deprecated, and then deleted after being replaced by the more efficient variants?

Also noting that the documentation page for Template:Don't edit this line is Template:Taxonomy/doc, and not Template:Don't edit this line/doc. I presume the latter lists the more efficient variants?

As background for why I'm here, I was trying to clear out Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded, which is mostly populated by sub-templates of Template:Taxonomy.

In researching this, I noted that the rationale for this template was to avoid populating Category:Template loop warnings, another category populated by the MediaWiki software, which I wasn't previously aware of. I've mostly cleared out (fixed) the pages populating the latter category.

From the documentation, I see that the taxonomy templates act like a database, storing taxonomic hierarchies. These don't produce any visible output by themselves. They simply store information. Except when looking at the taxonomy template itself, then it does show visible output, in the form of documentation.

The taxonomy templates are pages with titles of the general form "Template:Taxonomy/<taxon>" where <taxon> represents the name of the taxon. This is a very large database. Indeed, looking them all up with WP:AWB, I found that there were over 16,500 pages in this database. Only 420 of those are in Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded.

While most of them display reasonably well, showing no obvious problems, I found that Template:Taxonomy/Atokasaurus shows errors and looks not useful. Despite that, the automatic taxobox in Atokasaurus looks fine.

And while most in this expansion depth limit exceeded category are transcluding "don't edit this line", Template:Taxonomy/Rhytidosteidae/? transcludes something else (Template:taxon?). – Wbm1058 (talk) 23:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Taxonomy/Acrophyseter populates Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded, but the seemingly slightly more complex Template:Taxonomy/Acrophyseter deinodon does not. If I replace with the result from input text of Template:Taxonomy/Acrophyseter into Special:ExpandTemplates, as in this version, that removed Template:Taxonomy/Acrophyseter from Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded, but put Template:Taxonomy/Acrophyseter deinodon into Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. Go figure. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The template is not redundant; the comment in the text is wrong – the documentation correctly states that it's used by every "Template:Taxonomy/..." page to generate the table shown on the right when the page is viewed. I'll fix this if the protection level is changed. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 7 October 2016

Please change the protection to allow template editors to edit this template (as per other taxobox-related templates). Then I can fix the incorrect HTML comment, among other matters.

Peter coxhead (talk) 09:03, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. It's nice to see Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded has been reduced to just a handful of taxonomy subtemplates, from over 400. Your assistance in documenting how this works is much appreciated! wbm1058 (talk) 11:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Unclosed table causes Linter error

This template appears to be missing the closing pipe and brace that would end the table on the left that shows the Parent, Rank, etc. Paste the wikicode for Template:Taxonomy/Cladotheria into Special:ExpandTemplates to see an example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:12, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: I think the problem may be in {{Taxonomy key}}. Wikipedia:Automated taxobox system/map#Displaying a taxonomy template shows the call hierarchy. Since {{Taxonomy key}} is called by every one of the 51,000 or so taxonomy templates, I'm reluctant to change anything without testing, which requires constructing a chain of sandbox versions, including Module:Autotaxobox, and I don't have time right now.

In general, there are places in the autotaxobox code where tables are opened in one template and closed in another, so it's not always an error if there are unmatched table openings and closings in a template. (Some were necessary when categories stopped working within tables, in order to implement error-tracking categories at the point that the error was discovered when that was within the construction of a table.) Peter coxhead (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

I think you're right about {{Taxonomy key}}. It looks like it should have table closing code on a new line after the last curly brace. I pasted the table into User:Jonesey95/sandbox3, and then expanded it in Special:ExpandTemplates. Please experiment when you get a chance. It doesn't seem to be causing problems in article space, so it's not urgent.

I am aware of the many templates that either start, continue, or end a table; they exist in many subject areas and are quite inconsistent in their implementation. I try not to get too frustrated or to dream of a grand unified set of table-related templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: after some testing, I decided that the failure to close the second table produced in {{Taxonomy key}} was just an error, and I've updated the template. The change doesn't seem to have caused any problems. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! That fixed the problem at Template:Taxonomy/Cladotheria, and probably in other places as well. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:03, 6 October 2018 (UTC)