Template talk:Header/2009

Adding a way to categorize the author or title
Is there any way to add a category for the title and author. That way a person can just type in "category:Aesop's Fables" and see the list of fables? 69.120.130.231 15:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Propose add "See also"
I would like to add reference for the style to add Anonymous authors, and was thinking to add a section at the bottom that referred onto Anon. Alternate suggestions welcomed. -- billinghurst (talk) 01:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggest add
I would like to see the addition of  akin to   so that the active hyperlink can be excluded in the   field. Thanks. -- billinghurst (talk) 22:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

So would I. I went ahead and used the parameter for Visit of the Hon. Carl Schurz to Boston/Reception by German Citizens/Address by Professor Krauss. The provider of the translation in this case is the same as the author which was specified as. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I just tried editing twice but the result would not show up. I may need an expert.--Jusjih (talk) 02:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Year
I suggest that a year = section be added to allow for speedy categorization within the header by year. Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Which year? Original publication? The edition we host? Year of translation? ... Eclecticology - the offended (talk) 05:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This function has a head start. If you want to specify which year, enhanced function will be better but complex. Pending that, just write in the note for now.--Jusjih (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That wasn't quite my question. If a year appears in the header, how are we supposed to know what it represents. Is it one of the possibilities that I mentioned, or even something else. Eclecticology - the offended (talk) 20:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I would suggest the year of the work for which copyright will apply. So it becomes the  .  If it is getting more complex then that, then that would be the guidance for Keep it Simple. -- billinghurst (talk) 07:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The year doesn't necessarily appear in the header, it is for categorization purposes. Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I did not mean adding the year to the header, rather a field that adds the page to Category:X works. Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That sounds worse. Publishing details should continue to appear on the page itself, while the utility of such categories is marginal at best. Eclecticology - the offended (talk) 22:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't object to the year being added to notes, but the "in the year" method is ugly. Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

class
Hi. How could I add a new class like "headertemplate" to my own wiki? I wanted to add this template to my wiki but I found out that I need the above css class. --80.71.122.147 11:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello 80.71. The CSS classes for this template are defined at MediaWiki:Common.css. Just copy the code below to "MediaWiki:Common.css" on your wiki, and update your browser cache to see the changes.


 * — Pathoschild 12:02:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * thanks --80.71.125.133 11:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Correct the override_translator
Please correct the code with the code from http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Sandbox&oldid=1220547 You can see some of my testcases in http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Sandbox&oldid=1220550. It makes the override_translator works. Vinhtantran (talk) 11:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oops we missed this. Apologies.


 * An edit has already been undertaken to header and you can see the results of the your test against this file at http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Sandbox&oldid=1529995 billinghurst (talk) 12:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Header and Scans
I would like to propose that we look to add (yet) another field to header that provides a direct link to the relevant image file Index: page. Tentatively call field   though I could be convinced to call it a number of things.

I would propose that the field be
 * non-mandatory
 * a) not all works have scans, b) I would envisage to use this more where a work is divided into sub-pages, and the Table of Contents is the more usual on the main page. Noting that normal transclusion processes show page links where transcluded directly


 * show as the first component in the Notes display
 * have a standard visual text "Link to scans"
 * or whatever we chose to call it


 * that the information by the filename without the INDEX namespace rider
 * more flexible and akin to how we handle images


 * possible pick up the status of the work, similar to the pictogram used (top of page) where pages are transcluded directly

Probably other things that others can add or vary. -- billinghurst (talk) 12:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * First thoughts are that this sounds like a great idea! If it were to pick up the status of the work (eg. validated) it would be most useful if it only considered the pages transcluded by the article itself. Suicidalhamster (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Translator aesthetics
Hi. Would it be possible to make some minor changes to the formatting of the optional "translator" parameter?

Currently it appears on the same line after the author with a comma in between. Even the common is unaesthetic, for some reason an unneeded space appears after the author's name and before the comma.

But it would be preferable for the author to have his own line, and for the name of the translator to appear afterwards on the next line. Is this possible? Desirable? Dovi (talk) 19:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The space before the comma seems to be due to the table formatting, and there is presumably a cellspacing or cellpadding within class=headertemplate.
 * The ideas around the formatting of the author and translator within header pre-dates me and I would presume it is about not making the table longer than necessary. It is not something with which I wish to play and doesn't upset as it is, that said I am not against the idea of a change being explored. billinghurst (talk) 22:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The space is somewhere in the nested #if: statements. Still looking. billinghurst (talk) 23:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * space issue found and ✅. It was actually removing two different spaces within #if: statements and placing it in another place. billinghurst (talk) 23:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)