Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:15, 30 June 2013

Rivers Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver Template This template does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Mouth and Source Coordinates

Could a field be added to give the coordinates of the mouth, perhaps using the {coord} template? A field could also be added for the source coordinates using coord, useful if the source were not some other geographic feature already tagged with coordinates (EG not a lake). papageno 01:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Good idea! Markussep 09:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The other river infobox {{Geobox River}} has fields for source and mouth coordinates. You might consider converting the infobox for rivers you want to add coordinates to, to this other template. Markussep 15:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see discussion of coordinates at WikiProject Rivers. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The above linked discussion is now archived here. related discussions are at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Rivers/Archive 2#Geographical coordinates and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Rivers/Archive 2#Use of Co-ordinates on river pages. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Upgrade

I went and upgraded the template so that it would convert to and from imperial/US and SI. I hadn't realised that it was being replaced with a new version. I'll document the upgrade but put a depreciated tag on the page. JЇѦρ 05:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Image size

The discussion page notes the default image size of 288px. This is great for horizontal images, but too big (in my opinion) for tall ones. Any way to override the default? See my problem at: St. Croix River (Nova Scotia) Verne Equinox (talk) 00:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• I concur. This box is usefull but size is distracting. It dominates some articles I'm working on. My contributions
  Can one of you infobox gurus please add the operator: width= to control box size.
  

Also same request for Template:Infobox Waterfall. Thanks Marcus (talk) 18:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Possibility of expanding to cope with German Misplaced Pages articles

German Misplaced Pages has its own equivalent of this infobox (but with a few more parameters). It would considerably aid the transfer of articles from de.wiki if there was an infobox on en.wiki which recognised the German field names and automatically translated them into English and I could quite easily create this. However that would mean a second infobox (called Infobox Fluss) with a similar purpose. However it should be possible to expand this one to cope with the German fields by using a redirect and adding the extra coding required. Obviously the German coding would not be noticed by articles created in English from scratch. Is there merit in doing this (I might need some help) or should I create a separate template? --Bermicourt (talk) 15:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

It is possible to modify the Infobox River in order to use German infobox information. The same has been done for town infoboxes ({{Infobox German location}}). Once that has been done, {{Infobox Fluss}} can be a redirect to Infobox River. I see the German infobox has more fields than the English one, I'm not sure we need all that information. Markussep 15:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds cool! Although the German infobox does have more fields, in some cases they display two fields as one e.g. source name and coords are separated in the infobox but display together, whereas the English infobox sticks all the data in one field. The end effect is similar. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Let me see which fields could be merged:

• NAME = river_name
• BILD = image_name
• EINZUGSGEBIET = watershed
• LÄNGE = length
• QUELLE = origin
• QUELLHÖHE = elevation_m
• MÜNDUNG = mouth
• MÜNDUNGSHÖHE = mouth_elevation_m
• ABFLUSSMENGE = discharge

The other fields can't be used directly, but have to be translated or converted. Markussep 18:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Progression

I've added a "progression" parameter; which can be seen in use on River Penk to describe the path taken by the waters of a river which is a tributary of one or more other rivers, and does not empty directly into a sea or lake. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

River system

I've added a "river system" parameter, corresponding to the de.wiki "Flusssystem" one. So now German rivers at least can be easily updated. --Bermicourt (talk) 12:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision suggestions

May I suggest some minor revisions to the template:

• Change "origin" to "source" since that is the generally accepted term for the start of a river
• Change "watershed" to "catchment area" or "drainage area", since watershed means different things to US and non-US geographers
• Change "basin countries" to "location" since, for large countries like USA, Russia or Germany, it is too vague. "Lower Saxony and Hesse, Germany" is a good location descriptor but they are not basin countries.
• Slightly increase the field name column, so that names with 2 words can still fit on one line and don't unduly extend the table
• Slightly increase the data column, so that a full coord can display on one line (see problem at Gerdau (river))
• Consider tweaking the format to include lines (as at de:Böhme (Fluss)) - looks neater IMHO.

--Bermicourt (talk) 12:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Geobox

I have proposed that we delete {{geobox}}. That may effect this templates. You are invited to particiapte in the Geobox deletion dicussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Geobox, again

It seems, from comparing the before and after version of this edit, that {{Geobox}} has more features for rivers than this template. I propose that we improve this template to match, then deprecate the river-specific instances of Geobox. Thoughts? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:41, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Strongly oppose - what is the basis for deleting this functionality of Geobox (and I presume eventually the whole template)? What policy or even guideline says Misplaced Pages cannot have two similar but not identical templates? Why spend all the time and effort to change this template and then to replace Geoboxes in river articles, when we have a Geobox that already works well and (as you admit) does more than Infobox:River? By the way, glad to see that you are feeling better and back on WP Andy. Ruhrfisch _><>° 15:03, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I seem to recall answering this question more than once previously. Perhaps you weren't one of those participating at the time. The rationale is to reduce the long-term maintenance overhead; unify the appearance and location of information in related articles for the convenience of our readers and data re-users, and to minimise confusion for editors. Conversely, what is the rationale for having two, different, templates for the same function? As for the work involved, feel free not to do any of it. Thank you for your kind words about my health. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh wait, you were involved. Here's what you said: "if you want to get rid of Geobox, then 1) fix the infoboxes so they can do everything Geobox can, and 2) make sure it is as easy as possible to convert from one to the other, then ask again". That's exactly what I'm doing. It's already been done for mountains and mountain ranges, without fuss. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:48, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I have changed my mind (especially as I would have to do the work of updating the river articles I am the chief contributor to if this comes to pass). Misplaced Pages allows editors fairly wide leeway on how they do many different things here (please see WP:IAR). One example is that there are at least three different ways to cite references (with many similar but not identical templates). Are you going to "unify" those too?

Also, could you please answer my question "What policy or even guideline says Misplaced Pages cannot have two similar but not identical templates?" While you're at it, what policy or guideline says that we need to make life easier for our data re-users? This is a persistent theme in your posts Andy - do you have a conflict of interest? Are you being paid by any of these data re-users? Are you being paid to make things on WP more convenient? I am going to post about your proposal on the Geobox and Wikiproject Rivers talk pages (which I think you should have done already). Ruhrfisch _><>° 17:38, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Your assertion that you would have to do any work in this regard is false; I even said as much above. My declaration of interests is available from my user page. I shan't be wasting time, attempting to answer rhetorical questions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Andy, when it says here (about you) that "His advice has been sought recently by organisations including Google and FourSquare (on their use of Misplaced Pages data); and The BBC, Facebook and the London Assembly (on microformats)." was that paid advice? Do you have a COI? Are you being paid to edit and/or get rid of templates that Google, Facebook, the BBC and other re-users do not like? These are serious questions, not rhetorical.

I ask again (and not rhetorically), could you please answer my question "What policy or even guideline says Misplaced Pages cannot have two similar but not identical templates?" While you're at it, what policy or guideline says that we need to make life easier for our data re-users? I will add a question - where are there examples (on talk pages or elsewhere on WP) of users or editors confused by this template? Ruhrfisch _><>° 18:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I refer you to my earlier answer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

• Template-Class River pages
• NA-importance River pages