Template talk:Infobox German place/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Cite error

{{editprotected|Template:Infobox German location}} Something must've gone wrong in a recent edit. Apparently the template now produces a cite error on article pages, even if there are no <ref> tags used inside the article text. De728631 (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit: I suspect it is the pop_ref parameter that acts funny when no reference is provided but a population number is given. De728631 (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

It only happens on pages which don't have a {{reflist}}. Jared Preston (talk) 16:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I just noticed that. Anyway, it's annoying, maybe someone should have a bot run across German location sites to fix that. Also for some of these refs the German phrase "(PDF-Datei: <size>)" should be removed from the citation, or be properly translated. De728631 (talk) 16:13, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

There are a lot of pages in need of updating and having a reference list, yes. And I agree that the reference itself needs formatting. Jared Preston (talk) 16:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I have formatted the references from the Metadata templates. De728631 (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

So, if the population is automatically transcluded from {{Population Germany}} and this overrides existing entries we don't need the population related parameters any more. This should be reflected in the documentation and in the source code if applicable. De728631 (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, please do update the documentation, and help update the references. I will make a bot request to add the missing reflist. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that request, Plasticspork. I might go ahead and make a couple of adjustments to the ref codes on the metadata templates too, but from having a quick look just now it already looks much better. Danke De728631 and good work everyone! Jared Preston (talk) 20:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi, I made two edits to the sandbox version, see this diff. The population date and reference would give an error message if the "Gemeindeschlüssel" field was named "key", I corrected that. And I added a new field, "dissolved", for administrative units (mostly Verwaltungsgemeinschaften, Ämter etc.) that have been disestablished. See Elbe-Stremme-Fiener for an example using the sandbox version. The disestablishment date is added (format copied from {{Infobox District DE}}, change it if you don't like it), and the article doesn't show up in the population error maintenance category anymore. Markussep ^Talk 12:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I copied the sandbox over to the main template. Thanks for working on it, and let me know if there is a problem. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

That was fast, thanks! Markussep ^Talk 17:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I made an error with nested if statements, so the population number doesn't show for town subdivisions anymore. I fixed it in the sandbox version, could you update the "real" template? Markussep ^Talk 08:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to tweak the "dissolved" banner a bit. Let me know if you object to any of my changes. My thought is to make it stick out a bit less, and match the common wording of "disbanded" rather than "disestablished". Thanks Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks OK to me, I'll edit the district infobox accordingly. Markussep ^Talk 19:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Linking years

{{editprotected}}

The template is automatically linking years against current MoS guidelines. Please change this.

It looks like this

{{#if: {{{year|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}} |
{{!}} '''Founded''' {{!!}} {{#ifexist:{{{year}}}|{{#ifeq:{{#expr:{{{year}}}<100}}|1|[[{{{year}}}|{{{year}}} AD]]|[[{{{year}}}]]}}|{{{year}}}}}
}}

would be better like this

{{#if: {{{year|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}} |
{{!}} '''Founded''' {{!!}} {{{year}}}{{#ifeq:{{#expr:{{{year}}}<100}}|1| AD}}
}}

JIMp _talk·cont 10:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The space before the "AD" should be a & nbsp ; , could you change that? Markussep ^Talk 16:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

i.e.

{{#if: {{{year|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}} |
{{!}} '''Founded''' {{!!}} {{{year}}}{{#ifeq:{{#expr:{{{year}}}<100}}|1|&nbsp;AD}}
}}

sorry about that JIMp _talk·cont 17:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

That's right! Markussep ^Talk 18:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} What we discussed above still needs to be done, that is, replace

{{#if: {{{year|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}} |
{{!}} '''Founded''' {{!!}} {{{year}}}{{#ifexpr:{{{year}}}<100| AD}}
}}

by:

{{#if: {{{year|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}} |
{{!}} '''Founded''' {{!!}} {{{year}}}{{#ifexpr:{{{year}}}<100|& nbsp;AD}}
}}

Markussep ^Talk 10:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Clickable district maps

Hi, I copied another nice feature from German wikipedia: clickable district maps. Clickable image maps are currently available for 269 out of 301 districts. I translated and simplified (available input fields: file name and size) one as a test: {{Imagemap district DÜW}} (district of Bad Dürkheim), which works like this: {{Imagemap district DÜW|Neidenfels in DÜW.svg|250px}} =

. This is also used in my new sandbox version of this infobox. It uses the Lageplan or image_plan field, and detects which imagemap template to use from the district licence code in the filename ("DÜW" in "Neidenfels in DÜW.svg", licence codes can have 1, 2 or 3 letters). It works, see the testcase for Neidenfels. Comments? Markussep ^Talk 08:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

How could this be applied to other infoboxes about places, if there is consensus to do so? It's sensible to retain consistency between them. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the template uses standard code ("#tag:imagemap"). Do you think additional code needs to be added to the templates? I don't know of any similar infoboxes that use clickable maps, do you? I suppose it would be nice to have something similar for US states, that could be done in a similar way. BTW I don't create the maps or the imagemaps, I simply copy them from de:. Markussep ^Talk 11:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My view is that we shouldn't have one style of infobox for places in Germany, another for those in, say, the USA and yet more for elsewhere. If we implement something like this, it should be available for all places. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My proposal is not about changing the style of the infobox. It's simply about making the maps that are already there clickable. I suppose it's not too difficult to create a similar feature in Infobox Settlement, if the imagemaps are available. Markussep ^Talk 14:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Please replace this template with the version in the sandbox. This will make it possible to use clickable district maps. Markussep ^Talk 11:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

That code is quite convoluted. Could you indent it and add html comments explaining what each part does, to allow easier maintenance in the future? I did an example edit to the sandbox to demonstrate what I mean. --Waldir ^talk 14:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean. The code was indeed broken after you added your comments, it's quite sensitive to spaces. I added comments about what the various "if" statements actually do, does that make things clearer for you? Markussep ^Talk 15:23, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

That's great, thanks :) I  performed the edit. Cheers, Waldir ^talk 07:19, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

It works fine, thanks! Markussep ^Talk 08:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Imagemap problem

There's a problem with the imagemaps in the infobox: if the district code contains two letters (e.g. "EL") the district map is not clickable. The imagemaps worked OK when I wrote the code in June, but apparently something changed in the way spaces and/or strings are handled by parser functions. Anyway, I made a new version that works in my browser (IE 6.0), see Template:Infobox German location/testcases#Test Kluse. Please check whether it works in other browsers/systems. Markussep ^Talk 13:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

If I am clicking in the right place, Google Chrome 6.0.472.63 appears to function.imars (talk) 10:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

IE 8.0.7600.16385 also appears to work on both the live and sandbox versions.imars (talk) 10:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

That's funny, today the live version functions properly again in my browser. Case closed then. Markussep ^Talk 21:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Found the (probable) culprit: an edit to the {{str index/getchar}} template, that was reverted on 19:26, 15 October 2010. Markussep ^Talk 11:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Unlikely test/transclusion

Many instances of this template (I suspect all) are testing for the existence of Template:Imagemap Germany district. My understanding from *shudder* reading the code is that it attempts to construct the name of a relevant template ("Imagemap Germany district XXX") and transclude its contents. I suspect the links to the base template name with no suffix indicate a flaw in the process that generates the target template name. - TB (talk) 20:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Mea culpa. These imagemaps aren't available for all districts yet, so when there is a map, but not an imagemap, the infobox should show a regular non-clickable map. This works OK, but I don't know why there's a link to the non-existent {{Imagemap Germany district}}. Markussep ^Talk 21:51, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Additional "year" attributes

{{edit protected}} The "year" attribute is not used very often because it is not very useful. It would be good if we could fix that. The problem is that for most European cities the actual date of foundation is unknown. The corresponding template for US cities works better because it has two attributes: "first settlement" and "incorporation". Since the date of first settlement is almost never known for European cities, it would make sense to also have the date of first documentary mentioning (the date of the first written historical document that mentions the town). These dates are frequently listed on city websites and many cities base their anniversaries on them.

So, I'd propose to add two new attributes to the template:

• "year_of_first_mention",
• "year_of_city_status".

For example, Lüneburg was founded (first settled) at an unknown date in prehistory, it was first mentioned in AD 956, and it received city status in ca. 1189. What do people think? --Chl (talk) 03:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Could you please make the required changes to Template:Infobox German location/sandbox and reactivate the request? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Chl (talk) 05:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

 Added — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Unlink request

{{edit protected}} Please unlink the subheadings Country, Population, Population density, Area, Elevation, Square mile, Rural area, Urban area, Website, which are familar terms per WP:OVERLINK. This will bring this template into line with recent changes to {{infobox settlement}} - see Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#Unnecessary_links and Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#Unnecessary_links - unfinished business for the request and subsequent actioning there. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

punctuation bug in this template

In the article titled Bad Honnef, this template is used, and it gave the town's elevation thus:

55 - 455

I fixed this punctuation error (see WP:MOS) so that it says:

55 – 455

That is what now appears in the article, but there's an error message next to it saying there's a punctuation error.

Earlier on this present discussion page I raised this issue, and I thought we had then fixed the bug. But apparently it's not entirely fixed. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You need to use |elevation= and |elevationmax=, like this. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Show coordinates in title

Can someone please make the coordinates display in the title as well as inline? Thanks. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

 Not done You will have to be more specific as to what change you want made. Your best bet there is to copy the current version to Template:Infobox German location/sandbox and make whatever modifications are needed. You may also want to start a discussion to see if this change actually has consensus; I'm not quite sure what you're wanting done here, but it sounds like it might result in this infobox having a different display than every other similar infobox. Anomie⚔ 22:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly... What I want is to change |display=inline in the {{coord}} template used here, into |display=inline,title. This would result in the infobox getting the same display as every other infobox. This change will make the coordinates show in the upper right corner of the article as well as below the map in the infobox. In all (or at least the vast majority) other infoboxes having both is the standard. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 23:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done Ok, that makes sense. Anomie⚔ 23:24, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! :-) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Country

In the Administration section, please could the word "Country" be left-aligned, along with the others in that section? --Stfg (talk) 18:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Added {{Edit protected}} as the above has not given rise to comments and may be uncontroversial. --Stfg (talk) 13:42, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done They already do look left-aligned to me. Must be a browser thing, probably IE not inheriting text-align:left from the table for <th> or something like that. Anomie⚔ 16:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 17:56, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Establishment dates II

The template contains the following code:

{{#if:{{{year|}}}|{{#ifexist:Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}|{{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}]]}}} | {{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in {{{year}}}]]}}}}}}}}}

For values of |year= earlier than 1500, this attempts to put the page into a non-existent category like Category:Populated places established in 1499, which is in disagreement with the text on {{settleestcat}}. See Category:Populated places established in the 15th century - the correct category for such a place would be Category:Populated places established in the 1490s. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, since Putzbrunn contains |year=~996, this attempts to put the page in the non-existent category Category:Populated places established in ~996. GoingBatty (talk) 00:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

We should change that line to:

{{#iferror:{{#expr:{{{year|}}} + 1 }}| | {{#ifexpr:{{{year|}}}>1499|{{#ifexist:Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}|{{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}]]}}} | {{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in {{{year}}}]]}}}}}}}}}}}

I've tested it in the {{Infobox German location/sandbox}}, it works, see {{Infobox German location/testcases}} (Rothenburgsort and Essen cases). I added the "iferror" part to filter non-numerical entries, like your Putzbrunn example. Markussep ^Talk 07:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

The above was requested and there were no objections. The proposed solution was tested and apparently works so it should probably be implemented. Note that as I was doing cleanup regarding the classification by year of settlement, I've bookmarked a few articles affected by the proposed change and that will have to be recategorized manually. (which obviously I'll do once the template stops being in the way) Pichpich (talk) 22:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Done Thanks guys! --Redrose64 (talk) 00:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've recategorized a bunch of article and the change works just fine... except when it doesn't. :-) Unfortunately, it creates an error when the "year" field is absent or left blank. I noticed when I removed the (probably incorrect) data from the Prenzlauer Berg infobox. Pichpich (talk) 01:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:Redrose64 § Template:Infobox German location

 – Redrose64 (talk) 12:26, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, RedRose64. Looks like you introduced an error into {{Infobox German location}} with your recent edit. The pages that use it are now producing a "Expression error: Unexpected > operator" error. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 02:33, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's also what I came here to tell you. Please undo or refine your edit. Thanks. Kelisi (talk) 02:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted it here. It took me too long to realize it was definitely this edit because its action on the linked articles was delayed by a few minutes (whereas in my sandboxes it was almost immediate). Take care. Materialscientist (talk) 05:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

end of moved thread --Redrose64 (talk) 12:26, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Would it not just be better to categorise manually? Jared Preston (talk) 05:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Categorizing through infoboxes is usually considered a bad idea so yes, it would be better and {{Infobox settlement}} doesn't create this automatic category. The problem is that the German template has been set up in this way for a long time so removing that bit of code now means that we'll essentially have to manually categorize all pages that transclude {{Infobox German location}} and there are around 15,000 such pages so this can't be done literally manually. However, if we can find someone at Bot requests willing to do it though, it might be the best alternative. Pichpich (talk) 12:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

@Jason Quinn, Kelisi, Materialscientist: really sorry about that. I took the comments higher up as indication that the changes proposed by Markussep were satisfactory.

@Jared Preston: Ideally, per WP:TEMPLATECAT, yes: but we'd need to amend over 12000 pages. See Template talk:Infobox film#Edit request on 13 August 2012: do not categorize when not in mainspace to see the replies when I suggested that elsewhere. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't these alterations be a piece of cake for a bot? Obviously we need to find a bot operator willing to do it but this would require four lines of code. Pichpich (talk) 13:17, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I was looking at this as well at the same time trying to find out what was breaking the German pages. Doing some searching the problem could be too many templates under templates I believe. On some pages it was fine, but for others it was just too many cascading templates that went over the Mediawiki limit of 40. I think if the edit is to be redone maybe a less deep template should be used underneath. Canterbury Tail talk 12:37, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

It's not the transclusion depth, it's well under 40. You can simulate the same problem when going only about three levels deep:

Old code. Assume that |category= is absent.

• |year= is absent:
• |year= is present but blank:

New code. Assume that |category= is absent.

• |year= is absent:
• |year= is present but blank:

The problem is that {{#ifexpr:>1499 throws an error because there is no value before the > --Redrose64 (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Some more tests. Again, |category= is absent.

Old code

• |year=~996: Category:Populated places established in ~996
• |year=1450s: Category:Populated places established in the 1450s
• |year=1456: Category:Populated places established in 1456
• |year=1560s: Category:Populated places established in the 1560s
• |year=1567: Category:Populated places established in 1567

New code

• |year=~996:
• |year=1450s:
• |year=1456:
• |year=1560s:
• |year=1567: Category:Populated places established in 1567

The new code fixes the errors with |year=~996 and |year=1456 but no longer works as desired for |year=1450s and |year=1560s. It seems like only |year=1567 is working both before and after. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• I was going to look at this today, but Help talk:Citation Style 1#Problem with the DeadURL parameter is making me annoyed. So I'm going to do some nice safe railway station gnoming instead. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Categorisation criteria

It might be best if we started out by determining what the criteria for categorisation were. At present, the template has code as follows:

{{#if:{{{year|}}}|{{#ifexist:Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}|{{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}]]}}} | {{{category|[[Category:Populated places established in {{{year}}}]]}}}}}}}

Which essemtially means:

1. If |year= is blank or absent, do nothing, otherwise
2. if the category Category:Populated places established in the year exists, put article in that, otherwise
3. put article in Category:Populated places established in year
4. but if |category= is present (whether blank or not), that will override (2) or (3).

There is no attempt to check that the category set at step (3) exists, and this is the problem that first brought me here; and is also the problem described by GoingBatty on 7 June 2012. So, how about this:

1. If |year= is blank or absent, do nothing, otherwise
2. if the category Category:Populated places established in the year exists, put article in that, otherwise
3. if the category Category:Populated places established in year exists, put article in that
4. but if |category= is present (whether blank or not), that will override (2) or (3).

This would be coded as follows; note that I've brought the coding for step (4) out by one level:

{{#if:{{{year|}}}|{{{category|{{#ifexist:Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}|[[Category:Populated places established in the {{{year}}}]] |{{#ifexist:Category:Populated places established in {{{year}}}|[[Category:Populated places established in {{{year}}}]]}}}}}}}}}

There is no attempt to determine if the |year= is earlier than 1500. Doeas anybody wish to add to that? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Let me suggest once again that since this turns out to be complicated, we should really think about deleting this chunk of code from the template so that it falls in line with WP:TEMPLATECAT (don't use templates to place articles in normal content categories). All we need is a bot operator nice enough to take care of the transition. Yes, it's a lot of articles but it's a pretty simple task. Pichpich (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I vote for just deleting the chunk of code. there is no way we are going to be able to make it "bullet proof", without adding something like |category_year=. in addition, it thwarts category sorting, and is confusing when trying to recat articles. Frietjes (talk) 16:49, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

TfD

Please add {{TfD}}, linking to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 January 6#Template:Infobox German location. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Interwiki

Please change the "pt:" interwiki from "Predefinição:Alemanha/cidades" to "Predefinição:Info/Cidade da Alemanha". Thanks, --viniciusmc 22:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Jared Preston (talk) 22:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Lageplan exceeds expansion depth

The string testing of the image_plan/Lageplan parameter is apparently causing thousands of articles in Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Raising issue again: Page exceeded the expansion depth. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I created the part of this infobox that tests whether there is a clickable map for a locality. I don't know how this can cause this expansion depth issue. Is this a real problem, and do you have an idea how to solve it? Markussep ^Talk 20:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I haven't studied the code and don't know how to solve it but some string templates use nested #if's with many expansion levels to overcome the lack of real string functions in MediaWiki. I guess the expansion depth is exceeded inside one or more of the used string templates. Evaluation of a page skips places where the expansion depth is above 40. I haven't examined the consequences here but I guess it could potentially cause the infobox to misidentify whether there is a clickable map or what it is called. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I checked some pages using the infobox, but I haven't seen any errors: where a clickable map exists (Gangelt, Frauenwald, Norderney), it works correctly, and where no clickable map exists (Greifswald, Rantrum, Traunstein), a normal non-clickable map is displayed. Still, all these articles are in the Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded. Markussep ^Talk 14:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

• Today, over 3 months later, I have submitted the fix for the depth-exceeded problem, below: "#Fix Infobox_German_location to use Strfind_short". I apologize for not knowing sooner, because the error must have been very frustrating for others who did not know the prior months of work which had been done to avoid these kinds of template depth-limit problems. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Fix Infobox_German_location to use Strfind_short

I have created a fix for the depth-exceeded limit, in Template:Infobox_German_location/sandbox2 (2nd sandbox), as the update to use efficient Template:Strfind_short (7 levels), rather than slow Template:Str_find (23 levels), to avoid the 40-level limit, also center the plan-map, and even reformat 40% faster. The NewPP markup will show only 31 levels used, and 10,100 fewer preprocessor nodes, saving 2-3 seconds (40%) on reformat time. I regret that I did not know sooner (before today) there was a depth-limit problem months ago, in these extremely complex templates which I have spent months analyzing and updating. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It looks like you've found the solution, congratulations! Markussep ^Talk 07:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this. I no longer see German locations in Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded where they were abundant before. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Categorization only in mainspace

Could someone please change this template so it only categorizes in mainspace and not in userspace (e.g. User:Bppubjr/Alfeld) per WP:USERNOCAT? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Would you prefer it to decide as (i) mainspace/not mainspace - using {{main other}} or (ii) userspace/not userspace - using {{user other}} --Redrose64 (talk) 20:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Either one would meet the requirement of keeping articles categorized in mainspace but not in userspace. Not sure if the categorization should be done anywhere else. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Given that Template:ns0 is a redirect to {{main other}}, this edit should do it. Please test --Redrose64 (talk) 22:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks like that will remove Category:Towns in Lower Saxony from User:Bppubjr/Alfeld. Note that I don't mind if the template populates the maintenance categories in user space, as that could give editors a chance to catch their mistakes before moving their work to articlespace. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've modified it so that the maintenance cats go back to how they were. This is the present proposal; for pages outside mainspace, it would prevent cats like Category:Towns in Lower Saxony also those like Category:Populated places established in 1214 (which presently happens if the page has |year=1214). --Redrose64 (talk) 12:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks great - thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

That worked perfectly - thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Can someone more familiar with this code add population_demonym?

Something like what's used in {{Infobox_settlement}}:

{{#if:{{{demonym|{{{population_demonym|}}}}}}|
<tr class="mergedtoprow">
<td>'''[[Demonym]]'''</td>
<td>{{{demonym|{{{population_demonym}}}}}}</td>
</tr>
}}

Urhixidur (talk) 21:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Fixing of internal link

Please fix Bremen (state) to Free Hanseatic City of Bremen. --GirasoleDE (talk) 20:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Note: The article Bremen (state) is currently subject to a WP:RM. The link should not (yet) be changed. If the requested move is successful, then please feel free to reactivate the edit-request template. Jared Preston (talk) 00:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Zensus 2011 – changes in population numbers throughout Germany

There have been significant changes of official population numbers due to the 2011 census, whose results have recently been published via https://www.zensus2011.de (They introduced a new method of determining population numbers...) If I'm not mistaken, this renders all metadata templates for population numbers in Germany outdated. Is something in the works to update them? (I'm thinking about temporarily detaching the Infobox in the article I work on (by removing the Gemeindeschlüssel field) but I'm a little reluctant about this.) TurnspitDawg (talk) 20:02, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

your better option would be to have the templates used by Template:Population Germany updated. Frietjes (talk) 20:21, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Links to Template:Imagemap Germany district png

I believe this template is testing for the existence of Template:Imagemap Germany district png on around 3000 articles currently. From what I can see, this isn't by design - it looks like a check for a missing parameter has been omitted. Can an expert confirm please? - TB (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Italics

Per MOS:, some of the italics in this template are redundant. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

can you be more specific? Frietjes (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed replacement

I created an Infobox settlement-based wrapper for this template, a few test cases can be seen here.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

It looks nice, does it retain the categorisation based on the type of place? Does it retain the option of dual language field names to facilitate easy updatability from the source wiki. Agathoclea (talk) 05:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The categorisation system was copied directly from the live version, so yes. For the dual language support, it should work just like the current one, but I didn't check every field so some could be missing.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 12:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I suppose anything can be added later if it becomes apparent it is missing. @Kusma, Markussep, and Bermicourt: for further input. Agathoclea (talk) 15:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I edited the template, so that now it support coordinates in the Breitengrad/Längengrad format.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Even better, only thing I have not checked - got distracted - was a former municipality. Agathoclea (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The info that it is a part-entity belonging to X got lost. Agathoclea (talk) 09:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

If you mean the 'Quarter of X' banner as it appears on Rothenburgsort, it's back now.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

That is all I can think of. If you can hold off until @Markussep: had a look as he has a little more experience than me with this template. I left him a message to pop by but is not online everyday. Agathoclea (talk) 14:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi again! Please write me a message once Markussep is back (or ping me!) as I don't check this page very often.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 22:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I think everything works as it did and should, so I'm OK with it. Markussep ^Talk 17:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Does the template have to show the date in YYYY-MM-DD format (next to population) or can it be changed to show the date format as per our preferences? Jared Preston (talk) 20:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

They can be formatted to anything by using the {{#time}} function, so that 2013-10-03 becomes 3 October 2013, but the YYYY-MM-DD format has the advantage of being more compact. Anyway, either is fine with me.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 21:39, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request

Per the discussion above, please copy the content of the sandbox 2 into the main template.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Agathoclea (talk) 20:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, especially for including the right documentation, I didn't think of that.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi! This change has caused a bit of a redlinked (missing) image problem because of the coat of arms settings on a lot of these articles! example Kemnitz. I had been working on reducing Articles with missing files, and noticed that these articles kept popping up the last few days with the coat of arms (Wappen) set to kien (or a few set to none) causing them to be redlinked and flagged as missing files. At first I thought it was just old stuff that had been around for ages getting found by back-end processes and so had been slowly cleaning the articles up, however the number of articles with missing images just jumped over +700 and I tracked it back to this template change. As over 13,000 articles use this template I assume there are a lot of redlinked ones now that didn't have a problem a few days ago. Is there any reason why the support to ignore kein was removed, if not can it be added back? Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

indeed, thousands of these. update to this version of the sandbox to fix the problem. we can always add a tracking category to find and fix the articles, but until there is time to do that ... Frietjes (talk) 18:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Done — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 21:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

links to "Kyffhäuserkreis (district)"

This template seems to be creating links to Kyffhäuserkreis (district) [1] from articles where it is used with the Landkreis=Kyffhäuserkreis parameter. The behaviour is undocumented and surprising. —rybec 20:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Most likely that broke in the last major update. As far as I remember to sidestep the issue of most towns and ditricts having the same name (district) as added, but only if that article existed. That stopped working, so we either reinstate that behaviour or created the relevant redirects. Agathoclea (talk) 08:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

an 'ifexist' parserfunction check will always create a false incoming link. so, the solution is to either create the redirect, do this, or ignore it. Frietjes (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. I'll just make the rediect rather than changing those 47 articles. —rybec 21:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Missing parameter check

This template is generating links to (region) when none of the {{{Regierungsbezirk}}} {{{regbzk}}} and {{{region}}} parameters are set. The block of markup below needs to be wrapped in an additional set of tests. Posting this here in the hopes that someone better at markup and more familiar with this template can do so in an elegant manner. - TB (talk) 11:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

| subdivision_name2       = {{#ifexist: {{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region}}} }}} }}} (region) | [[{{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region}}} }}} }}} (region)|{{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region}}} }}} }}}]]
  | {{#ifexist: {{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region}}} }}} }}} | [[{{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region}}} }}} }}}]] |<!--else-->{{{Regierungsbezirk|{{{regbzk|{{{region|}}} }}} }}}
  }} }}

fixed, will require the articles to be re-cached to update the what links here. Frietjes (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Year founded

The year founded field adds the article to a category "Category:Populated places established in XXXX", but in the cases where the settlement was established before 13th century, there are no "Category:Populated places established in XXXX" categories and it autamtically adds the red category to the article. I personally think those currently red categories with only one article in it should not be created. So, is there a way that if the year inserted is smaller than 1200 for example it would add the article to a parental category "Category:Populated places established in the XXth century". See: Münster for example. Flying Saucer (talk) 12:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Flying Saucer: possible, but for now you can fix these by doing this. Frietjes (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Add missing default value

For example please add the Wikidata (and maybe more) {{#Property:P94}} as | #default = {{{Wappen|{{{image_coa|{{#Property:P94}}}}} }}} -- πϵρήλιο 12:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 12:55, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Demonym

I get that this will get a because you want other people to do your coding for you instead of addressing the merits of their request, but at some point a demonym field should be included into this infobox, if it's becoming standard for German location articles. — LlywelynII 04:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Infobox settlement overlap

Really, everything you didn't bother to copy from {{infobox settlement}} should be used here or the template should be depreciated. We shouldn't have to use two templates when one will suffice to get the same information across. — LlywelynII 04:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Population densities

I'm concerned that instead of being rounded to the nearest whole number (which is the usual demographic practice, as seen in, for example, the German-language Wikipedia) population densities are being expressed to an accuracy of just two significant figures. Given that the calculation for each location is based on a land area expressed to the nearest tenth of a square kilometre and an exact population figure, I believe that such rounding produces an unnecessary degree of imprecision in the results.

To take an example from Schleswig-Holstein, the population densities of Kiel and Pinneberg are both being expressed as 2000/km² – when there is in fact a substantial population density difference of 84 persons per square kilometre between the two places (the real figures are respectively 2036/km² and 1952/km²).

I know I can always go to the German-language Wikipedia for the figures I need in order properly to compare localities, but it seems to me a pity to have to be obliged to do so, and I would like to propose that the calculation be adjusted to produce results rounded not to two significant figures but to the nearest whole number, as in the German Wp. -- Picapica (talk) 09:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

see template:pop density, which uses the precision of the input. Frietjes (talk) 15:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

website - Website

A lot of German locations use the previously permitted lowercase parameter "website" instead of "Website". Could the infobox continue to support this variant please? Plan B would be to let the bot check and correct those "old" spelling variants. But as a lot of parameters in the infobox are lowercase anyway, it would probably make more sense to keep the additional variant (or switch to lowercase completely). GermanJoe (talk) 13:30, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@GermanJoe: What makes you think the lower-case |website= might no longer be supported? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:47, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

The problem was already fixed yesterday [2] by @Magioladitis: (thanks for that). That request can be set to Done, unless other editors prefer another solution. GermanJoe (talk) 10:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

@GermanJoe and Pigsonthewing: Both parameters are supported right now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:43, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 12 August 2015

I'm concerned that instead of being rounded to the nearest whole number (which is the usual demographic practice, as seen in, for example, the German-language Wikipedia) population densities are being expressed to an accuracy of just two significant figures. Given that the calculation for each location is based on a land area expressed to the nearest tenth of a square kilometre and an exact population figure, I believe that such rounding produces an unnecessary degree of imprecision in the results. To take an example from Schleswig-Holstein, the population densities of Kiel and Pinneberg are both being expressed as 2000/km2 – when there is in fact a substantial population density difference of 84 persons per square kilometre between the two places (the real figures are respectively 2036/km2 and 1952/km2). I know I can always go to the German-language Wikipedia for the figures I need in order properly to compare localities, but it seems to me a pity to be obliged to do so, and I would like to propose that the calculation be adjusted to produce results rounded not to two significant figures but to the nearest whole number, as in the German Wp. Picapica (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid this is something that is determined by Infobox settlement (this template is only a wrapper for Infobox settlement). More specifically, there is a rounding calculation in {{Infobox settlement/densdisp}}. I don't know exactly how to improve the precision of the density calculation, it's also a matter of preference probably. Markussep ^Talk 13:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

@Picapica: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. The problem (if problem there is) is not specific to {{Infobox German location}} but concerns all usages of {{Infobox settlement}} and if a change is to be made, should be discussed at Template talk:Infobox settlement/densdisp. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:48, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Red. To be honest, I would have been very surprised if the requested change had been executed at this stage! I hadn't imagined I was taking anything more than a first step. Ignorance of procedure on my part, clearly! I will take my case to Template talk:Infobox settlement/densdisp. Thanks, again, for the pointer. -- Picapica (talk) 15:27, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

'Höhe = elevation' alias does not work

By trial and error, I found that at the moment, only Höhe seems to work, elevation does nothing. Could this be because Infobox settlement uses elevation_m? --Quazgar (talk) 10:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

No, that's not the cause, elevation_m doesn't work either. Apparently it's been like this since October 2013, but nobody noticed it before. This line:

| elevation_m = {{{Höhe|}}}

should probably be

| elevation_m = {{{Höhe|elevation|elevation_m|}}}}}}}}}

Markussep ^Talk 14:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The parameters elevation_min_m and elevation_min_m should be supported. For example Frankfurt (Oder) tries and falls to use a range. Hairy Dude (talk) 02:31, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Elevation – bug report

If you look at Giessen, where the infobox has a line reading

|elevation = 155-304

the page displays
Elevation   155-304 m (−842 ft)
The template has interpreted the "-" as a minus sign, and done the subtraction before the conversion to feet, putting the town below sea level. Maproom (talk) 10:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Maproom: I also noticed this problem in Winterberg. |elevationmax= is mentioned on the documentation page as being intended for the higher part of the range (|elevation=155|elevationmax=304 in your example), but it isn't actually implemented. — Eru·tuon 08:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 31 August 2018

Requesting the addition of

        | Former Verbandsgemeinde = Former Verbandsgemeinden

to the Assignment to categories section of the template. There are already multiple pages in the corresponding category. Using the template as it is now incorrectly places the page in either Category:Municipalities in Rhineland-Palatinate or in Category:Verbandsgemeinde in Rhineland-Palatinate. AntiCedros (talk) 14:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:01, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Script errors

@Underlying lk: Please review the recent edit to Template:Infobox German location because it has put many articles in the hidden Category:Pages with script errors. See here for the list of articles. For example, Achern is showing 'Lua error in Module:Location_map at line 502: "Germany Baden-Württemberg" is not a valid name for a location map definition.' in the infobox. Johnuniq (talk) 08:38, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

The issue should be fixed now, I'll check back later to see if the category is emptying.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 09:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Settlement type

Hi. Just a heads up, but the parameter for settlement type seems to be malformed, as it's not pulling into a heading in the infobox (like cities/towns in other countries). But perhaps that's a conscious decision from folks who specialize in German geo articles? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

image_plan removed

Underlying lk: why did you remove the code for the parameter |image_plan= in this edit? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:05, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Michael that the maps showing the location of the municipality within its district were very useful, I prefer those over the {{Infobox mapframe}} they were replaced with. How about using Infobox mapframe only when there's no image_plan given? Markussep ^Talk 10:31, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

I've changed the sandbox version so it does that: Lageplan/image_plan if available, otherwise Infobox mapframe. Seems to work well. If you agree, I'll ask to copy it to the live version. Markussep ^Talk 19:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:58, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Please replace the current version of the infobox with this sandbox version. This changes

| image_map = {{#if: {{Infobox mapframe}} | {{hidden | header = Location of {{{Name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}} }}} }}} | headercss=height:5px; | content = <div class="center" style="margin-top:1em">{{Infobox mapframe|area_km2={{{Fläche|{{{area|}}} }}} }}</div>}} }}

into:

| image_map = {{#if: {{{Lageplan|{{{image_plan|}}} }}} | {{hidden begin |style=margin-top:0.2px |titlestyle=font-size:95%; height:auto; padding:0.1em; padding-left:0.3em; padding-right:1.5em; |border=line |title = {{#if: {{{Lageplanbeschreibung|{{{plantext|}}} }}} | {{{Lageplanbeschreibung|{{{plantext}}} }}} | Location of {{{Name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}} }}} }}} {{#if: {{{City|{{{Town|}}} }}} | within {{{City|{{{Town|}}} }}} | {{#if: {{{Kreis|{{{Landkreis|{{{district|}}} }}} }}} | within {{#switch: {{ucfirst:{{{Landkreis|{{{Kreis|{{{district|}}} }}} }}} }} | Kreisfreie Stadt | [[Kreisfreie Stadt|Stadt]] | Urban | Urban district = {{{Bundesland|{{{state|}}} }}} | #default = {{{Kreis|{{{Landkreis|{{{district|}}} }}} }}} district }} }} }} }} }} {{#ifexist: Template:Imagemap Germany district {{{Kfz|{{{licence|}}} }}} | {{#ifexist: Media:{{{Lageplan|{{{image_plan|}}} }}} | {{Imagemap Germany district {{{Kfz|{{{licence|}}} }}} | {{{Lageplan|{{{image_plan|}}} }}} }} }} | [[File:{{{Lageplan|{{{image_plan|}}} }}}|250px]] }} {{hidden end}} | {{#if: {{Infobox mapframe}} | {{hidden | header = Location of {{{Name|{{{name|{{PAGENAME}} }}} }}} | headercss=height:5px; | content = <div class="center" style="margin-top:1em">{{Infobox mapframe|area_km2={{{Fläche|{{{area|}}} }}} }}</div>}} }} }}

and restores the option to show a detailed map (usually of the district of which the municipality is a part). Markussep ^Talk 19:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. Ensure that the template's sandbox contains the code you want, and add to or modify the examples in Template:Infobox German location/testcases to show that your new proposed code works. Please ensure that your test cases test a variety of conditions in the new if statements. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

See {{Infobox German location/sandbox}} and {{Infobox German location/testcases}}. Markussep ^Talk 21:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done -- /Alex/₂₁ 23:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Markussep ^Talk 11:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Show area if wikidata area is not referenced properly

This template's use of wikidata for area was displaying a blank value if the wikidata number was not referenced properly. With the addition of a tracking category to catch those problems, the articles are now showing a red error message and Category:Pages using Template:DE metadata Wikidata without references. If we use the sandbox version of the template, I believe that the area will be shown with no error message, and the tracking category will appear. Do watchers of this page prefer the red error message so that wikidata entries can be fixed, or should the area given in the infobox be shown instead, along with a hidden maintenance category? – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd say show the given area and add the hidden maintenance category. For population data, there is a copyright issue according to Septembermorgen, see this deletion discussion. I don't know whether that is resolved now. Markussep ^Talk 07:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion of this particular error is moot for now, since the wikidata template has been removed from the infobox template; it wasn't working correctly for some types of populated areas, apparently. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Unknown parameter checking

For some reason, this widely used infobox did not have unknown parameter checking, which most highly used infoboxes have. I have added it. Articles will slowly populate Category:Pages using infobox German location with unknown parameters (0) over the next few weeks or months. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:42, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Update: More than 11,000 of the 13,375 transclusions have ended up in the tracking category. |Adresse=, |Adresse-Verband=, and |Straße= appear to be the most common unsupported parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

is there some bot that can work through these?  — Chris Capoccia 💬 11:12, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Categorization of towns/cities

The distinction between "towns" and "cities" does not work if the population is fetched via Gemeindeschlüssel, see this edit. --androl (talk) 15:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Is image_plan hidden by default? Can it be made default-visible when desirable?

For certain localities (e.g. Büsingen am Hochrhein, Amt Neuhaus), the zoomed-in location context map is THE most important image in the article. But when it's included in the infobox in the image_plan field, it seems to be hidden by default, so it will be easy for readers to overlook the image's existence, unless they happen to notice the tiny option to 'show' the image.

Is there any flag that could be added to the infobox text on those pages to make the images shown by default? Or should we just remove those crucial maps from the infobox and put then in the text of the article itself? Doops | talk 18:02, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

You're right. the default state of image_plan is collapsed. It's possible to make the image_plan visible by default (it is in mobile view), I think it's more difficult to make it optional. I guess it's a personal preference whether the map is the most important image of the article. I have no objection to making it visible by default, anyone else? Markussep ^Talk 11:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Elevation ranges

The documentation says |elevation= accepts number or range in meters, and unless a range is specified, automatically converts to feet. Teisnach has a range, but the infobox shows what looks like an average preceeded by a dash that could look like a minus sign. I think the template should be changed to match the documentation, or if this is an intentional average of the range, the output should be clarified, perhaps with "avg" instead? Frietjes? MB 18:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

User:MB, should work now, you can find examples for checking in Category:Pages using infobox German location with an elevation range. Frietjes (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Looks good. Thanks as always. MB 18:33, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Lord mayor

The mayor argument is rendered as "Lord Mayor" in infoboxes. But since Germany is not the UK and has no outdated "lord" titles, there are no lord mayors. Bürgermeister should be rendered as mayor, and Oberbürgermeister should as well, or maybe as chief mayor or chief executive mayor. ♆ CUSH ♆ 20:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Please link to an example article. The documentation appears to be correct. The mayor title is supposed to render as "Mayor" if a title is not supplied in the infobox. It will render as "Lord Mayor" if |Oberbürgermeister= is used or if "Lord Mayor" is the value of |Bürgermeistertitel=. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Push-pin map problem

This is an example of the country map being showed twice when |state= is not specified (although the doc says state is optional). Probably best to track these and just add the state? Frietjes? MB 16:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Articles using this infobox without specified state should show up in the maintenance category Category:Germany articles requiring maintenance. It is a required parameter in the TemplateData table, I'll fix it in the examples. Markussep ^Talk 19:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Obsolete <tt> tag on pages

There are a good number of pages where the argument to |licence= has been surrounded with the <tt>text</tt> tag, which is obsolete. See Hohberg for an example. I fixed a number of these pages, but there's clearly a systematic problem. If the consensus is that the licence plate code should be monotype, can we add this formatting to the template rather than on (possibly) thousands of individual pages? Anthrópinos81638 (talk) 12:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the <tt>...</tt> tags should be removed. I don't see a reason for special treatment of this one parameter value. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 October 2020

The wikipedia article linked to "Amt" (-> Amt (country subdivision)) in:

| subdivision_type4 = {{#if: {{{Gemeindeverwaltungsverband|}}} | [[Gemeindeverwaltungsverband|Municipal assoc.]] | {{#if: {{{Samtgemeinde|}}} | [[Samtgemeinde|Municipal assoc.]] | {{#if: {{{Verbandsgemeinde|}}} | [[Verbandsgemeinde|Municipal assoc.]] | {{#if: {{{Verwaltungsgemeinschaft|}}} | [[Verwaltungsgemeinschaft|Municipal assoc.]] | {{#if: {{{Amt|}}} | [[Amt (country subdivision)|Municipal assoc.]] | {{#if: {{{Verwaltungsverband|}}} | [[Verwaltungsverband|Municipal assoc.]] }} }} }} }} }} }}

now redirectes to Amt, because the article was moved.

Please change the link to Amt directly.

Thank you. ElLutzo (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Pop_ref

The documentation says there is an argument pop_ref, for giving the source for the population figure. But the parameter is not recognised by the template. --ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

|pop_ref= was apparently removed from this template in 2013. It should be removed from the documentation. It appears that population footnotes are provided by {{Population Germany}} when |Gemeindeschlüssel= is defined. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 25 October 2020

Titles in WP are written in lowercase (MOS:JOBTITLES), especially in the generic form, so the output (and wikilink) of "Lord Mayor" in this template should be changed to "Lord mayor". Mauls (talk) 09:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor Mauls:  done, and good catch! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 20:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request 2020-11-10

replace

| timezone1               = CET/CEST (UTC+1/+2)

with

 | timezone_link           = Time in Germany
 | timezone1               = [[Central European Time|CET]]
 | utc_offset1             = +01:00
 | timezone1_DST           = [[Central European Summer Time|CEST]]
 | utc_offset1_DST         = +02:00

TerraCyprus (talk) 00:35, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Wappengröße

It seems that the parameter |Wappengröße=, contrary to the documentation, is unsupported. If so, it ought to be removed from Template:Infobox German place/doc and Template:Infobox German place/Instructions. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

It is not supported. You are welcome to remove it from those pages, or recommend a way to add support for it. Documentation pages are typically not protected. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Request for modification of Elevation parameter

The documentation says: "To prevent an error in the conversion to feet, any range values must use a simple minus sign instead of any other dash characters" I think this ought to be changed to include toleration for the ndash (in addition to the minus sign), as this would be the correct form according to our manual of style -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 22:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 23 September 2021

Could someone please update the template to replace relevant instances of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern with Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, as it currently appears to auto-populate soft redirects such as Category:Municipalities in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Thanks! Jevansen (talk) 04:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. It could take some hours before the old categories are depopulated. Markussep ^Talk 06:50, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request 2021-09-29 - type

Category:Pages using infobox settlement with no settlement type contains several articles using this infobox. If the parameter "Gemeindeschlüssel" exists, the type can be "municipality". TerraCyprus (talk) 02:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

The code is bad,

| settlement_type         = {{#if: {{{City|}}} {{{Town|}}} {{{Municipality|}}} | {{{Art|{{{type|Suburb}}} }}} of {{#if:{{{City|}}} | {{Link if exists|{{{City}}} }} | {{#if:{{{Town|}}} | {{Link if exists|{{{Town}}} }} | {{#if:{{{Municipality|}}} | {{Link if exists|{{{Municipality}}} }} }} }} }} }}

Potsdam has type=City but this is not shown. Please fix. TerraCyprus (talk) 02:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

One problem is that |type= in this template was not being passed to |settlement_type= in infobox settlement. I have fixed that problem. There may be other, more subtle, problems. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I have adjusted the above to set |settlement_type=Municipality if |Gemeindeschlüssel= has a value and |type= is not already set. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Great, thank you! TerraCyprus (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request 2021-09-29 - municipality key

Please pass the value of Gemeindeschlüssel to {{{Geocode}}}. In articles in dewiki it is displayed too. TerraCyprus (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Back in 2007 it was decided not to show the Gemeindeschlüssel, but I don't think there's much harm in showing it. Note that spaces are often inserted into the Gemeindeschlüssel, for instance "09 7 61 000" for Augsburg. If we don't want that, we can use {{Schlüsselconverter}} to circumvent that (it's used for the population templates now). {{Schlüsselconverter|09 7 61 000}} gives 09761000. I don't know of any other way to strip the spaces, formatnum doesn't do it. Markussep ^Talk 13:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

{{replace}} can strip spaces: {{replace|09 7 61 000| |}} → 09761000 – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

That's nice! I replaced "Schlüsselconverter" with "replace" in the infobox. Markussep ^Talk 07:07, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Specification of districts

What is the point of having two redirects to the same page? In case it is an urban district, I suggest removing the wikilink from the value, as it is already in the parameter. Moreover, I would suggest simply inserting Urban instead of Urban district. --Almicione (talk) 09:18, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Term for elected mayors

Is it possible to have a better visualization of this parameter in the box? I would suggest putting Lord mayor and the term in two separate lines, otherwise the results might be unsatisfactory, as it is in Munich, Cologne and Karlsruhe. --Almicione (talk) 09:40, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

For me (using Monobook skin) Munich has the title and the term in two lines, Cologne and Karlsruhe (with wider pictures) in one line. Most places with an "ordinary" mayor have them in one line too, see for instance Althengstett. How would you like to have it? If you know how to edit templates, you can try for yourself in the {{Infobox German place/sandbox}}. Markussep ^Talk 17:10, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Dialectal version in the field of the German name

The user IvanScrooge98 inserted Kallsruh in the field of the German name of the city of Karlsruhe. As confirmed by the same user, this is neither the English nor the German name of the city, but rather a dialectal version, never considered official by any authority. If I do not see Kölle in the infobox of Cologne, why should we put Kallsruh in the infobox of Karlsruhe? The user's motivation is that "this parameter would almost never be used if we had to stick to the Standard German name, which in most cases is the form already in use in English", which does not really seem a solid argument and in any case it is a misuse of the field of the infobox. --Caramelize donorz (talk) 22:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The thing is I don’t see why that parameter was reserved to the Standard German name, for the above reason. If I use the “Infobox location” template, the same parameter is more generically thought for the native name, why shouldn’t it be the same for German locations, given the wide variety of local languages and dialects of Germany? 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 23:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I surprisingly noticed that it is a common practice for other cities to include the dialectal version. I found some examples in Modena and Nantes, even though Turin does not include the widespread dialectal version Turin. Padua includes both the Italian and Venetian version (but of course there is no space for the variant Padoa). Messina goes even further and includes a Greek version but no Italian version – since it equals the English version – but Valencia does the opposite and include the Spanish version (together with the dialectal version) even though it is the same as the English name of the city. I want to point out that the field in this infoboxes is labeled |native_name and is different from |official_name. This difference is not present in the Infobox German place.

In a nutshell, it seems to me that there is a common confusion in these infoboxes for cities, and it would be great to homogenize them with common guidelines, for the inclusion or exclusion of dialectal variants. Ivan, you seem to be much more expert than me: do you know a better place to discuss this topic? --Caramelize donorz (talk) 10:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I honestly don’t know if there is a more specific talk, but leaving a note at Template talk:Infobox settlement pointing here will possibly have more people join in. I’ll do it. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 10:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Not wrapping like it used to

When I first started working on German settlement articles some years ago, it was very straightforward importing the infoboxes as they automatically displayed the parameters in English. This ability seems to have been lost over time to the point that when we import "Infobox Ortsteil einer Gemeinde in Deutschland", almost all the parameters now fail. In some cases it's simply because de.wiki has "Vorwahl1" and "Vorwahl2" whereas this template just has "Vorwahl" or they have "Ortswappen" and we have "Wappen". Can we not do the same as on many other similar templates and have "Infobox Ortsteil einer Gemeinde in Deutschland" automatically replaced by "Infobox settlement" (maybe via this one) and then amend the latter if need be to take any missing parameters e.g. minimum elevation or date of incorporation or population census dates? It seems crazy to spend hours manually changing parameter data that could be done by the software. Bermicourt (talk) 21:08, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll also add that this template's design makes it so that non-English parameter names are used in articles. Most of our editors do not understand German and this makes editing this template unnecessarily harder. This template should be turned into something similar to Template:Infobox mountain/Berg where the template is automatically subst from the German version. Gonnym (talk) 18:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 30 May 2022

Remove the following five lines: | timezone_link = Time in Germany | timezone1 = [[Central European Time|CET]] | utc_offset1 = +01:00 | timezone1_DST = [[Central European Summer Time|CEST]] | utc_offset1_DST = +02:00 Since all places in Germany are under the same time zone, this is just infobox-bloat which adds nothing of significance to articles. I'd have boldly removed this if I could. Wikipedia is not a travel guide, and I fail to see what the purpose of this information otherwise is; particularly since the article Time in Germany exists and is a far better excuse than bloating every single infobox of a place in Germany with this. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. Articles on settlements often show time zones. Not everyone knows that all of Germany is in one time zone. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The time zone information was expanded in November 2020 at the request of TerraCyprus. Before that, time zone information was in the template since before the 2013 conversion of this template to use infobox settlement. Removing these accurate and long-standing parameters is not uncontroversial. Please discuss. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind reverting the time zones display back to the situation before 2020 (CET and CEST on one line), also because TerraCyprus was a sockpuppet of blocked user TobiasConradi. Markussep ^Talk 10:46, 31 May 2022 (UTC)