Template talk:Information

Template:Information has been protected indefinitely because it is a highly-used or visible template. Use {{Edit request}} on this page to request an edit. Please test any changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in a user subpage, and consider discussing changes at the talk page before implementing them.

Archives 1, 2, 3

Merge "license" section into this template

Because of the large size of many license templates (and often there are multiple licenses), the "permission" field of this template tends to be underused, and we typically have a separate subsection with the license template, plus a "see below" remark. Why not simplify this by having this template display the license below the main Information box, adding the "license" subsection header? I think this should work fine (it should be sandbox-tested first!) and it would reduce duplication and confusion.

Potentially it would also make it easier to improve display of attribution requirements. Currently, this is partially in this template and partially in the license template. If we do this merge, it'll be neater to improve this, because we can pass parameters to the license template "don't display standard attribution", and that will be very close to non-standard attribution parameter in this template. PS I do understand there'd be a lot of cleanup to do, but I think a bot should be able to do it, by removing the "license" section and moving whatever license templates it finds into this Information template. Rd232 (talk) 01:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The issue has been discussed several, for instance here, without any consensus. Some users feel that "license" and permission (eg OTRS) should be in two clearly distinct fields. Personnally, I agree with you, I cannot see any reason why the OTRS ticket should be inside the infobox and not the license. If anything, the permission should be less obtrusive, because it is way less relevant to the end user than the license. Beside if the license was really not part of the permission, the "see below" message would not make any sense.

By the way, if we want to streamline file description pages, I'd really like to see something done about quality/featured images banners too. They currently often appear under the license header -and some users consistently move them above the infobox where the crowd out everything.) By now, the project should be mature enough to use a more standardized and more discreet style (most Wikipedia just have a small star in the top right corner)--Zolo (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I am such a user. IMO only OTRS templates and similar should be inside the information template. Everything else (large and often multiple license templates, user templates) should be outside. We could also have a bot run for this. :-) --Leyo 08:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if we made any progress in the last year, but I think the issue stems from disagreement about where the license should go. Personally, I would like for the license to go directly below the information template (the header is pointless but maybe machines like them, I don't know) and remove the permission field completely if it's empty or contains only useless stuff like "see below". I think putting the license in the permission field is neater for smaller licenses but if it's one way or another for all licenses, then outside it should go (cause some are huge). With 12 million files, it would be quite a lot of work, even for a bot (or several). Rocket000 (talk) 08:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Apparently headers (like 'file description') are here for people not machine (though I for one would not mourn them). At least dont see what machines machines can do with them given that a fair number of licenses are currently inside the infobox.

@Leyo: I know that some license templates are long and I agree that they look better outside of the infobox, but this does not mean that they should not be in the template (I dont know if it would have any real benefit though) But I really dont find it coherent to have the OTRS and the license at two different places. If the license is out of the template, cant we have the OTRS ticket outside as well ?--Zolo (talk) 10:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Ideally, we will someday create a new file page template (possibly even with some new MediaWiki extension functionality) that will organize and structure the whole page. It wouldn't be one giant purple & grey box, but a framework for the various boxes we already have. For example, we could do away with using all license templates (and others) directly. Simply fill in the parameter, e.g. |license=cc-by-3.0, to generate the correct license.. |feature=yes gives you a star in the corner, etc. Ok, so the amount of work makes it somewhat unrealistic but we should think of the bigger picture and start moving in that direction a little by little. Rocket000 (talk) 10:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Some licenses can be huge, see for example here and they do not fit well inside {{Information}} template, although I still like to place them there is they are small enough. On one hand it would be fine with me to display license always on the outside of the {{Information}} template. However I am concerned about any drastic changes, since this template is used so much and users often use it in "innovative" ways, which might no longer work after the change. --Jarekt (talk) 13:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The uploading algorithm could easily place the licence templates to the infobox (it doesn't allow using a lot of them together).

Besides, probably it should enable using a custom licence or offer also localised CC versions – ex. I cannot applicate cc-by-sa-3.0-cz, as it doesn't exist among the options offered, thus I have to use the basic upload form (a casual user doesn't know that it's possible) or release the work under cc-by-sa-3.0 (which I don't want) and change it subsequently. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 12:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Add optional "Assessments" parameter

Example

Description
Date
Source
Author

If you think this file should be featured on Wikimedia Commons as well, feel free to nominate it. If you have an image of similar quality that can be published under a suitable copyright license, be sure to upload it, tag it, and nominate it.

Discussion

{{editprotected}}

Code to be added (after </table>): {{{assessments|}}}

Field would only show up if an assessments parameter is passed a value (which would be {{assessments}} itself) as it appears above. This is to make sure assessments template(s) always appear after Information template. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 18:01, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I do not think anything like this should be part of the template–it is an info-box, with a user-defined content. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 18:14, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with User:Petrus Adamus --Jarekt (talk) 18:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You do realize, in terms of appearance nothing would change, right? The idea is to enforce assessments template be put below {{Information}}, not above. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 19:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You can't enforce people using the argument to this template any easier than you can enforce people putting it below the Information template. I also fail to see a good reason to add it to this template. 19:13, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done. Please obtain consensus before adding {{editprotected}}.

As for my opinion: I don't think this is a good idea. This template should stay as simple as possible. Multichill (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)