| Revision as of 15:25, 28 February 2010 editJubileeclipman (talk | contribs)13,427 editsm →Potential minimal infobox: rm stray '← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:15, 1 March 2010 edit undoQuiddity (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers40,758 edits move discussion to User talk:QuiddityNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| Thoughts and feedback welcome. ~~ ~~ | Thoughts and feedback welcome. ~~ ~~ | ||
| ... | |||
| ... | |||
| :It might be useful to add ''several'' examples: (a) the disclaimer, ''I ''do not'' mean this to imply that "x" should have an infobox'', is enough, and (b) there is nothing to stop ''anyone'' using the box—that's the point! (No ''WP-approved'' guidelines actually preclude/prescribe infoboxes ''at all''.) --]] 01:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks. I've added one more example at the documentation page. I'm thinking that I'll sleep on it, and post this in the afternoon/evening, after checking in with you :) Feel free to overhaul/tweak my wording however you deem helpful. It's kinda pointform at the moment.... <sub>zzz</sub>zzzZZZ<sup>zzz</sup>-- ] (]) 09:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'll check it out. Thanks again for taking the time to do this! --]] 14:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hm. I wonder if if it could be widened a little to include classical musicians in general? I'll add a lead to the documemtation explaining that this one is for ''composers'' but note that ''no'' classical musician has a specific infobox! --]] 14:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::OTOH, I can see a strong advantantage in restricting it to composers: ''lack'' of over-fielding... As it stands, the info box is fine. Maybe just reduce the clutter in the doc by removing some of the less important links? ('''Leave''' the ''RfC'' link there though obviously...!) --]] 14:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Folantin makes a good point over at the RfC: perhaps the documentation should use only ''contemporary composers'' for its examples...? (Riley and and a reworked Bradley Joseph would do, I suspect) --]] 15:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:15, 1 March 2010
Potential minimal infobox
User:Quiddity/composers Given that there seems to be agreement that some few composer articles have an appropriate infobox, can we talk specifics?
In the draft infobox at User:Quiddity/composers (displaying whatever its current form is, on the right), I've taken the various suggestions above, and created a minimal infobox, with sample documentation. Feedback would be appreciated, here.
Up front, any final infobox documentation would make it very clear that additional fields (beyond those that we can agree on here) would need a substantial consensus before being added.
I've used Vivaldi as an example, but I do not mean this to imply that the Antonio Vivaldi article should have an infobox. :)
In the sample documentation, I've included a longer example containing fields that will not be applicable in every case.
At the bottom of the sample documentation, I've included a list of "Fields that are purposefully Not included".
Hopefully that all seems sensible, and will prevent most future disagreements from starting.
Thoughts and feedback welcome. ~~ ~~