Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Short description templates

Hello! I'm an admin from SqWiki and we have imported the same modules and templates that EnWiki has in regard to the settlement infobox. Can someone explain to me why are we getting so many auto-generated templates (link) from this template? I understand the general outline of the mechanism at work with the short description and Wikidata. I don't understand why are we getting templates and what should be the content of those templates generally speaking. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

See WP:VAR. The magic word SHORTDESC does not exist on your wiki. There are probably a few ways to work around this difference. One probably stupid idea is to change Stampa:Short description so that it is blank on sq.wiki. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, oh... Any idea how the other wiki projects have handled this? I mean, we can ask for SHORTDESC to be activated as a magic word at us as well but... Are there any reasons why only EnWiki has that? Is it just that other wikis haven't yet asked for it? Or are there other reasons at play? — Klein Muçi (talk) 16:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Other wikiprojects use the short descriptions that are provided by Wikidata. We at en.WP decided we didn't like that method. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, ah... What change do we do so that we go the Wikidata way? — Klein Muçi (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

No changes. If you go to the search box on sq.WP and type "Ernest Koliqi" (do not press Enter), you will see suggested results. Below the article title for first result, you will see "shkrimtar shqiptar". That short description is automatically pulled from Wikidata (click "All entered languages" near the top of the page to see the descriptions in many languages). – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, I see. What about depopulating the wanted templates list? Is there any change you can suggest that gives a good solution to that? Apart from blanking that template (which looks like a crude hack - maybe it's not?) — Klein Muçi (talk) 19:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

If you wanted to customize your imported templates to remove calls to Stampa:Short description, I suppose you could replace the contents of Stampa:Short description with a tracking category that would tell you which pages are trying to create short descriptions. If you modify those templates, they would stop trying to use the template. The problem will happen again when you import new versions of the templates, of course. I have tried to think of a negative result from blanking the template, and I haven't thought of anything. It is probably the best option. I would leave some documentation in place; feel free to copy some version of this conversation over to the documentation page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, soo, like this? Just double-checking I've understood you correctly. (Assuming just deleting the template wouldn't work, no?) — Klein Muçi (talk) 20:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Now if you edit sq:James Blunt and open "Stampa të përdorura në këtë faqe:", you will see that it is not trying to find "Stampa:SHORTDESC:Musical artist‏‎" anymore. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, thank you very much for the detailed help! Hopefully the wanted templates list will soon be depopulated now. — Klein Muçi (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit request 28 September 2023

Reposting this as I realized that I hadn't posted it as an edit request. I've noticed that several short descriptions for Brazilian municipalities use the following format "Municipality in REGION, Brazil". This can be seen in the following articles: São Gabriel da Cachoeira, Tabatinga, Petropolis, etc... While not incorrect, this would be like the Chicago article being "City in Midwest, United States" or the San Francisco article being "City in West Coast, United States". I think these short descriptions are autogenerated from pulling the subdivision_type1 field from the settlement infobox template. I propose instead that it should use the subdivision_type2 field, so that it uses the Brazilian state that the municipality is located in. BaduFerreira (talk) 15:26, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@BaduFerreira: the issue is that the use of these fields is not the same country-to-country. For example in the United States, type1 is for state and type2 is for county. Not sure what the best fix here would be. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm very new to Lua and can't figure out how to make local changes and test them in a non-disruptive way, but wouldn't picking subdivision_name #3 instead of subdivision_name #2 if subdivision_name #1 is Brazil work? Would that be too computationally strenuous for every instance of Module:Settlement short description to check if the country is Brazil and, if so, do different behavior? BaduFerreira (talk) 22:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

You use the sandbox copies of both Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox and Module:Settlement short description/sandbox to experiment. No it would not be too computationally strenuous to do that check, and it may be that other countries will benefit from your work too. I can envisage some kind of configuration table which tells the module how to format the short descriptions for various different countries. I've disabled this request because it is obviously a long way from fruition. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:42, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Mapframe?

Sorry for silly question; is it possible to get mapframes in the Infobox? I see in the archives that it was discussed in 2020, but a "mapframe" arg doesn't seem to work for me. toobigtokale (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 28 October 2023

Under "Parameter names and descriptions", the description for 'population_note' should not refer to Windsor, Ontario as an example, as that article infobox no longer (evidently) contains any entry for 'population_note'. A different example should be found for reference. Veggies (talk) 08:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: {{edit template-protected}} is usually not required for edits to the documentation or categories of templates using a documentation subpage. Use the 'edit' link at the top of the green "Template documentation" box to edit the documentation subpage. Let me know if you cannot edit the /doc page for some reason. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 15:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Old name as "other name"

From what I observed for the actual usage of the field, other name is meant for commonly used and presently used name for a city. Saint Petersburg doesn't have "Leningrad/Petrograd", Nakhon Ratchasima has "Korat".

Can we add an old/former/historical names field for this purpose? Like Parañaque is barely known as Old Palanyag these days but the archaic name was added in at some point.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 07:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

That depends on how common the old name is still being used. But in general, former and archaic names should not be used as "other name" (I have been removing those too when I see them). Regards, -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I realized I have editing perms for the documentation. I tweaked the usage guide for other_name as per this discussion. Is my version better and more clear? (from "For places with a former or more common name like Bombay or Saigon" to "For places with other commonly used names like Bombay or Saigon") Hariboneagle927 (talk) 10:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

I think it would be clearer, if the intention is not to use this for old names, to find examples that are not also old names. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Is there a way to change what order the information displays?

I Would like to have the factual information display above the images/maps, & have the nickname(s) be directly bellow the actual name. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

No, there is no way to change the order. Nor should there be! Just imagine all the edit wars if every user changes the order to what they like, not to speak of the lack of uniformity... -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

• The problem is look at the way the infobox looks on this page: Middleton, Utah
• Is there any custom infoboxes I could use?

😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 14:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox settlement is the infobox that communities in USA use, please don't change to some other random infobox. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't going to use a random one, the problemis the fact that you have to scroll to the bottom of the infobox to see the usefull facts. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 16:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

The infobox in that article isn't that bad compared to the length in some other articles, such as Dallas. My point is meant that you really don't have a choice, because all community articles use the same template. Anyway, I moved the photo in that article, so now your problem is solved. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 20:44, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

thanks 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Edit request 14 November 2023

Description of suggested change: Please remove {{{Short description}}} from the list in Check for unknown parameters (Short description was removed in 2019-08) — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 10:41, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Added about 6k articles to the error tracking category — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 21:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Vote for consensus on "Order of maps"

Hi, the order of maps should be first pushpin_map and then image_map, because we should start from general to more specific. This rule is not applied for example in the article Bushehr. I.e. it currently shows first image_map and then shows pushpin maps. Please do something to reverse it. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit template-protected}} template. Primefac (talk) 20:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss to reach consensus about changing order. We should first show more general map and then show more specific one. I.e., pushpin should be on top of mapframe image. Pushpin shows more general aspect, i.e. map in a country or continent, and then we show inside content in mapframe image. So the order should be reversed. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 08:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

@Primefac Is my method of reaching consensus, ok? If it is, please vote for it yourself. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 08:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

@Primefac Making consensus on this change seems a very time-consuming process. But I really think that this change is reasonable, the order should be from more general to more specific. This order is obvious and is applied in many other phenomenons in science and in English language. So, I think that it is obvious, and no consensus is needed, because it is very time-consuming. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 17:04, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

See below. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with this change. Such order is purely based on subjective preference. Who says that we "should" have the general map first? There is no benefit to changing this. We're not changing layouts every time someone doesn't like it... -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Motto parameter

Regarding the 'motto' parameter: if the character-string of a motto contains commas, it appears to be parsed as containing more than one motto, and the display of the motto in the Infobox reads Motto(s):

Is there a workaround? and/or could the spec for 'motto' be tweaked?

Protalina (talk) 15:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

It looks like a comma is currently set so that {{Pluralize from text}} views it as "likely", hence the (s) as it's not definite. I don't really know if we can make a hard delineation between mottos with a comma and multiple mottoes in one parameter. Primefac (talk) 21:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

The documentation for that template says to insert {{force singular}} into the parameter value in the affected article. It works. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Huh, missed that. Good catch. Primefac (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 December 2023

On Navajo Nation, the flag currently bears the alt/title text "Flag of {{{official_name}}}" because the flag alt/title does not use the page name by default. It seems this also happens with the seal, coat of arms, etc.

Please replace all instances (7 of them) of

{{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{{name}}}|{{{official_name}}}}}

to match the syntax used for this infobox's |above=:

{{if empty|{{{name|}}}|{{{official_name|}}}|{{PAGENAMEBASE}}}}

I've tested this change at Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox. There's no applicable test case for this since all of the ones in /testcases all have set |name= or |official_name= parameters (to avoid "Template:Infobox settlement/testcases" from being used). But you could go to Navajo Nation, edit the article, replace the use of "Infobox settlement" with the sandbox, and it should work properly in the preview. Chlod (say hi!) 03:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done hi chlod SWinxy (talk) 01:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

thanks, @SWinxy! :D Chlod (say hi!) 01:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Why is Hellersdorf in the "bad settlement type" category?

Can anyone explain why Hellersdorf in Category:Pages using infobox settlement with bad settlement type? – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:51, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like this gets rid of that error and creates another one? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Confusingly, |City= is a valid parameter in {{Infobox German place}}, which is a wrapper for this template, which calls Module:Settlement short description, which generates the error category. I haven't been able to figure out why the module thinks that the value it is fed is a bad settlement type, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

"Show both" instead of "Show all"

When there's two maps that can be flipped between, instead of an option that says "Show all" it should say "Show both". Akeosnhaoe (talk) 10:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Some articles contain more than two pushpin maps in the infobox (though I don't think I've seen more than three). Deor (talk) 12:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I understand, and for those cases (3 or more) it should be "Show all". Akeosnhaoe (talk) 03:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

It's irrelevant - this is not the place to discuss the matter, as this infobox has no control over {{Location map}}. If you want the map to change as proposed, it should be discussed at Module talk:Location map. Primefac (talk) 13:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Embedding Infobox UNESCO World Heritage Site

When I set the value of child parameter of the sub-template to Yes, why doesn't it appear as intended, especially within Infobox settlement? The border still exists. Natsuikomin (talk) 11:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you give an example? E.g. at Marrakesh this seems to work as intended. Fram (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

In George Town, Penang infobox. Can you believe what I've been going thru?
The order of paramater matters. The sub-infobox should be right below the website parameter (so the website would be the last parameter in the infobox if the sub-parameter were removed). And the infobox I edited has its website parameter in the middle of the other parameters. Moreover, the value of child parameter inside the sub-infobox should be 'yes' (not capitalised) instead of 'Yes' (capitalised).

This is the first I met a case like this. I used to think that Wikipedia server machine will not take the order into account and just rearranges the parameters order for us when we want to render the page on our browser. Hereby, I have found the solution after it took me about 1 hour. Thanks. Natsuikomin (talk) 12:54, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I lately noticed a new thing about the order. The order is the case if I don't use the module parameter. I originally just put the Infobox UNESCO World Heritage Site at the bottom of the parent infobox because I took the infobox on Hebron as an example. Hmm.. Natsuikomin (talk) 13:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

The documentation for this template explains: "module: To embed infoboxes at the bottom of the infobox". You figured it out on your own. The order of parameters does not matter if they are used correctly. I have fixed Hebron. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I know. At first I used the module parameter, but the sub-infobox had a border around and the width didn't occupy 100% as it looks now on George Town, Penang and Hebron. It likely happened because I set the value of child parameter of the sub-infobox to 'Yes' (capitalised) instead of 'yes' (not capitalised). That's why I use Hebron infobox as an example and, as you can see from my previous comments, the second problem came. Natsuikomin (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Move some items from left side to right side

I think some items, like elevation_max_point and elevation_min_point, should be moved from the left to the right side. When there is too much text on any row on the left side (like these two parameters), the left column automatically becomes wider and the right column becomes narrower, which isn't great, because the right column generally has more text overall.

An example is Montgomery (village), New York, where you can see the wider left column and narrower right column. I prefer names, areas, and population density on a single line when possible.

I will also note that the "desktop" and mobile views look different. There is much more whitespace on the "desktop" version, and on the page I mentioned, the ratio between left and right column widths is better on the mobile version. Kk.urban (talk) 20:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

That page looks normal to me in both the desktop and mobile versions. I use the default Vector 2022 skin for desktop. That said, I also think those two parameters should be moved to the right side; they are values, not labels. I have modified the sandbox, and you can see a test case in my sandbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jonesey95 It looks different from "normal" because on most settlement articles, the right column is wider than the left. Your sandbox looks good. Kk.urban (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Default image alt text duplicates caption

This code for this infobox when embedding an image contains |title={{if empty|{{{image_caption|}}}|{{{caption|}}}|{{{image_alt|}}}|{{{alt|}}}}}}}. When the alt= parameter is empty or missing, this results in the image's ALT text getting set to the text of the caption. (example) This is an improper ALT text: The alt text is intended to be read out by screen readers just before the caption, so avoid having the same details in both. (MOS:ALT) This behavior is also unhelpful for sighted readers in that it repeats the caption right below the image. Opencooper (talk) 16:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

When I expand the infobox at Algiers using Special:ExpandTemplates, I do not see any |alt= attributes in the code for any of the images, but there is a lot of code. Can you please create a minimal example showing the problem? – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more clear. The alt attribute I am referring to is in the final generated HTML on the article's page. If you right click the image and use your browser's inspect element feature, you'll see <img […] alt="Clockwise, top left[…]. Opencooper (talk) 00:00, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

What would be your proposed resolution? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Many other Infobox templates set the image title to the alt text, if there is any. So one solution would be to stop using the caption: |title={{if empty|{{{image_alt|}}}|{{{alt|}}}}}}}. Opencooper (talk) 05:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to make that change in the sandbox to see if it makes a difference. When I expand the infobox at Algiers, the File call in wikitext looks like [[File:Algiers Montage.png|275px|'''Clockwise, top left''': Coast of Algiers, [[Maqam Echahid|Maqam Echahid (Martyrs' Memorial)]], [[Notre-Dame d'Afrique|Basilique Notre Dame d'Afrique]], [[Ketchaoua Mosque]], [[Kasbah of Algiers]], [[Grande Poste d'Alger|Algiers Central Post Office]], [[Ministry of Finance (Algeria)|Ministry of Finance building]]]]. I don't see an alt tag in there, which makes me think that changing this infobox will not change the rendered HTML. Something in the MediaWiki code may be generating the alt text in the rendered HTML. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I was operating under the assumption that these templates did not use the image linking syntax, but this proves otherwise. Therefore, your comment over at Infobox writer seems to apply: when thumb […] is not specified [and] no alt text is specifically requested, use the requested caption as alt text. So technically this is expected behavior of the image linking syntax. (though confusingly, is not seen on all Infobox templates) But this behavior is against the MoS and results in unhelpful duplication. However, I'm not sure where to get this changed and would probably need an RfC. Opencooper (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Two maps conveying the same information in infobox

Resolved

Is there a way to remove the pushpin map in Milwaukee while keeping the switchable map above it? Because that's switchable, it shows the same information to readers and greatly extends the infobox. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 21:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, if you really want to do that, you can simply remove the |pushpin_map= parameter (and the two following parameters) in the infobox. You could get some pushback from other editors, though. Deor (talk) 21:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Deor: The problem is that leads to the first map showing all its parameters, instead of remaining switchable. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 00:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I see two switchable maps at that link. What exactly do you want to see? – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Apologies, I meant to link to a diff.

I think I've figured out the issue–it may be something to do with article caches. When I removed pushpin second map again, I once again saw the first map go from switchable to showing four separate maps. But after purging the cache, the article appeared normal again. I tested and had the same thing happen at Detroit, including the cache purge fix. Funky. Apologies for taking up y'all's time! Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 03:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 1 June 2024

Description of suggested change:

Would it be possible to add 'police' and 'fire' fields after the government section please? I'm sure this is a pretty universal field for most settlements and tagging it on the bottom in the blank fields with GDP etc. looks a little odd.

Dgp4004 (talk) 23:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

That stuff belongs in the "Government" section of the article. There is already too much infobox bloat. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Please suggest the change and get consensus for it before activating an edit request. Johnuniq (talk) 03:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Oversized maps

User:RAGentry has been adding oversized maps to hundreds of US city articles. My concern is that this makes the infobox unnecessarily wide (the default size is 250 px). At Berryville, Texas, for example, there are no photos in the infobox, so no need for an oversized map. The input of others would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

In my defense, 250 is only a default and not prescribed, and there are plenty of articles which use 280 as the size of their infobox. 280 makes the maps easier to see and understand and ensures that the entire shape fits into the map. The idea of "oversized" is subjective, considering it is only a 30 pixel difference. Is it really that big of an issue? RAGentry (talk) (contributions) 16:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, I note that on the main page of this template, Template:Infobox settlement, one of the example infoboxes is 275px wide, while the other is 290px wide. These are both wider than the default of 250px. That both examples are wider than 250px seems to me to suggest that expanding beyond the default of 250px is definitely acceptable, especially if the circumstances support it (such as increased readability of interactive map thumbnails), and especially if they are not being increased beyond 290px wide, which is the width of one of the example infoboxes in the documentation of this template. I would suggest that the examples of an infobox in its documentation provide more weight to the acceptable widths of a template than the default width in the template parameters. RAGentry (talk) (contributions) 16:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

In general, the size fields shouldn't exist at all to all wikimedia to auto size the images according to user preference settings or default settings, except to shrink photos in infoboxes. Large fixed sizes are a problem on small devices such as smartphones, especially in infoboxes. Almost always, I delete those fields from the infobox, and I recommend you to do the same. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

That's a good point; I see how having no fixed size could be beneficial. The problem with this is that in the case of interactive maps, the infobox is ultimately going to be widened by the frame width set in the Maplink template. Removing these creates a rectangular map (300px wide by 200px high) rather than a square map, which is the norm for interactive maps on city articles. It also makes the infobox 300px wide, which might be offensive to some people. What do you think might be a good workaround for this? Also, where in preferences can the images be auto-sized? — RAGentry (talk) (contributions) 22:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Where does it say square maps "is the norm for interactive maps on city articles"? At Template:Maplink, the infobox example is rectangular, and the template specifically states "additional parameters are available to customise the displayed map", such as width and height. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Norms just refer to something that is standard, not necessarily something that is written in as policy. I mentioned it to explain why I chose to use square maps, referring to the trend seen in articles such as Erie, Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, San Francisco, and others. Of course, it is possible and likely that there are others that do not match this trend, but I was using square maps because it is what I saw in other interactive maps on city articles. The example in a template documentation is not a requirement, and that there are additional parameters available to customise the displayed map seems to suggest that it is not a requirement for it to be rectangular. — RAGentry (talk) (contributions) 23:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

My slight mistake, preferences has a setting for thumbnail photos in the article, it appears to not affect the infobox. In general, many infoboxes are already too dang big in community articles, and increasing the size of photos or maps makes the problem much much worse. Remember that a user can click on a photo or map to see a full size version of it, thus solving the size problem. Please do not increase the size of maps or images in infoboxes. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 22:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I will not increase the size of maps or images in infoboxes. — RAGentry (talk) (contributions) 23:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

A small bug/edit request

Greetings and felicitations. In the La Habra, California infobox there is a carriage return between the estimate and the estimated population note. This is consistent between (Mac) Firefox and Safari in desktop mode, though it does not appear in iOS Safari. I'm hoping that someone can find and fix the problem, please. —DocWatson42 (talk) 05:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think this is a bug on the template side, the code is

| label88 = &nbsp;•&nbsp;Estimate&nbsp;<div class="ib-settlement-fn">({{{pop_est_as_of}}}){{{pop_est_footnotes|}}}</div>

Which puts the "as of" directly before the footnotes with no extra space, so it's likely a wrapping thing. Primefac (talk) 22:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay—thank you. ^_^ DocWatson42 (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 17 June 2024

Description of suggested change:

Please replace the manual conversion formulas in this template with Template:Convert as unfortunately the existing set up is producing errors (please see Template talk:Infobox settlement#Conversion error above). Probably not a quick edit I'm afraid, sorry to make big work.

Dgp4004 (talk) 17:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I think the area formulas are actually held in this sub-template: Template:Infobox settlement/areadisp. Would this request be better submitted there or is this sufficient please?

Dgp4004 (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I would if I understood it. But it's fiendishly complex sadly. Dgp4004 (talk) 23:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Conversion error

I've encountered a strange error in the area fields and I can't think what's causing it.

In KM2, area total can be larger than area land. But once converted into sq mi, area land becomes larger than area total. You can see this in action at Borough of Halton.

I can only think it must be something hard coded in the conversion, perhaps a rounding error? It doesn't occur when using Template:Convert. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me will know what might be behind it please. Dgp4004 (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Having experimented a little, it seems to be a problem very specific to the figure of 90km2.

• 89km2 converts correctly to 34 sq mi.
• 91km2 converts correctly to 35 sq mi.
• But 90km2 concerts incorrectly to 30 sq mi.

Very bizarre. Dgp4004 (talk) 16:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Likewise, I have noticed that the template is inaccurately converting 5,181 km2 to 2,000 sq mi on the Powys page. It should be 2,003 sq mi.

Would it not make sense to use template:convert in the infobox rather than the formulas used presently which don't seem to work?

Dgp4004 (talk) 08:53, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Probably; this template is old and likely had much of its features written/created before {{convert}} was as good or widely-used as it is now. Primefac (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

A few comments here:

• 5181 km² should convert to 2000.3 mi², not 2003. The template is behaving correctly in this case.
• The value 90 km² is ambiguous: it's unclear whether it has one or two significant figures. The template assumes it has one significant figure, hence does the conversion like {{convert|90|km2|mi2|abbr=on|sigfig=1}} → 90 km² (30 sq mi). There's currently no way to specify significant figures to the template.
• {{convert}} has a more clever way of determining rounding, so it does the conversion more like you expect: {{convert|9000|km2|mi2|abbr=on}} → 9,000 km² (3,500 sq mi). You may not consider this correct, however, since it only preserves 2 significant figures.
• Probably the right thing to do is to substitute {{convinfobox}} for {{Infobox settlement/areadisp}}. I'll experiment with this in the sandbox.

— hike395 (talk) 02:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Sadly, {{convinfobox}} only accepts up to 3 units, while {{Infobox settlement/areadisp}} can handle 5. {{Infobox settlement/areadisp}} also correctly sets the order of the displayed units according to country, while {{convinfobox}} always puts the specified unit first.

This can all be fixed if we port convinfobox over to Lua, which will take some amount of work. — hike395 (talk) 02:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for looking into it—I wouldn't know where to start! Dgp4004 (talk) 07:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC)