Template talk:Infobox planet

Edit request 1 June 2023

Description of suggested change: Add a Description to the lowercase "symbol" Parameter in TemplateData.

Diff:

Change this line from:

−

"symbol": {}, "image": { "label": "Image", "type": "wiki-file-name", "suggested": true

+

"symbol": { "label": "Symbol ", "type": "string", "required": false, "suggested": false, "deprecated": false, "description": "symbol of planet"

99.236.142.92 (talk) 15:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

The /doc is unprotected so you are welcome to make the change yourself, though I am concerned that the change you propose will not work owing to the proliferation of {. Primefac (talk) 09:22, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 13 January 2024

Change the background to a web color, so from:

| headerstyle = {{#if:{{{background|{{{bgcolour|}}}}}}|background-color:{{{background|{{{bgcolour|}}}}}}|background-color:#E0CCFF}}

to:

| headerstyle = {{#if:{{{background|{{{bgcolour|}}}}}}|background-color:{{{background|{{{bgcolour|}}}}}}|background-color:LightGray}}

CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

​ Genuinely curious, why? Primefac (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Purple headers in the infobox feels out of place and clash with the infobox pictures. Since this template is used most in minor planets and most minor planets are of gray color, this change will make the header color feels more concordant with the image. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

This feels like something that should have consensus, so I am not going to enact this right away but will leave an opportunity for folks to comment on the proposed change. Primefac (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I've cross-posted this to WT:AST and am watching the page, so wherever the consensus ends up I should be able to deal with it. Primefac (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

  →   I'm indifferent. Either works. SWinxy (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Opposed. The current color matches well with the color of links, and so doesn't look out of place. It also highlights the sections of the box better. Grey is pretty drab. Maybe though we could automate background=lightgrey when minorplanet=yes? — kwami (talk) 22:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - The proposed   is nearly/identical to the Lists of minor planets'  . The LoMPs have used white for inner main best asteroids, and 2 slightly darker shades of grey for middle and outer main belt asteroids for at least as long as Template:Minor planet color code legend has been around (at least ~7.5 years), so it would be best to not overlap planet colors with minor planet colors.   is not used in the LoMPs.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  23:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Do remember that almost all minor planets that have its own article uses this template, like 1 Ceres or 1000 Piazzia. Infobox of actual planets in the Solar System already have their own headings that match their colors. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 00:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

image size → image scale

'image size' is deprecated in info boxes (as generally for images) because it overrides the reader's default preferences and is thus a problem with accessibility. For example, if a reader with poor vision sets their display to 200%, and we size an image to 150% to show greater detail, the reader will see it at 75% the size of an unadjusted image, so trying to make an image larger can actually make it smaller and more difficult to see. The solution is to use the 'upright' parameter, which uses the reader's preference as the default. Setting that to 1.5 will increase an image's size to 150% for everyone. However, we probably shouldn't be individually resizing very many images in the infobox (unless maybe they have an odd shape; e.g. maybe Perdita (moon)), and instead choose a standard size here for consistency.

(The weird parameter name "upright" is due to its history. It was originally a quick way to set 'upright' (portrait) images to 75% of the default width of a landscape image, so it wouldn't be oversized, which is why setting image_scale=yes reduces it to 75%. The param was later extended to relative rescaling of any size. The unintuitive name might be why people don't use it much; it took me years to realize what it was.)

There are lot of template errors generated for deprecated 'image size' (e.g. asteroids with the asteroid number used for the image size!), which I'll be going through with JWB. Most are historical detritus that should be cleaned out anyway (e.g. from years ago when all imgs were individually set to 250 px rather than using a common infobox default).

Note that AFAIK small images will not be embiggened past their actual size. We've been reducing them to their original size in pixels; that's no longer necessary.

The default size should now be encoded as "upright = 1.3". We can adjust that here if e.g. a slightly larger size would be better for this template. (Most of the resized imgs were set at 250 to 265 px, 10%-15% larger than the WP default of 225 px; a few orbital diagrams of asteroids and the photo of 243 Ida were set to 300 px, equivalent to image_scale=1.33.) On my machine, the pics at Earth, Jupiter and HD 81040 b, for example, are just under the width of the infobox at image_scale=1.5 and so IMO look best at that size, but I don't know how that would translate to other readers. — kwami (talk) 19:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Standard gravitational parameter

GM is typically known to higher precision than G or M, and is often encountered as such in formulae, so it's useful for more precise calculations. I wanted to add it for Earth, but it seems we need to discuss this. So, how about it? Is it too much detail for Wikipedia? If we don't allow it here, I don't see where else it might have a good place, so this data would be missing from Wikipedia, then. Darsie42 (talk) 12:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Mean radius and mean diameter

I suggest to add wiki-links for mean radius and mean diameter to the infoboxes. Renerpho (talk) 23:37, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I think the only reason why they hadn't been added before is that those articles are relatively new. Renerpho (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

'Yes' vs. Yes

Bruce1ee has reverted an IP edit to Laomedeia today.[1] In the edit summary, Bruce1ee wrote that image_scale uses a scaling factor, see Template:Infobox planet, but I think this problem originated with the template. To quote the example given on the template page: 1.25 increases image size by 25%. 'Yes' reduces to 75%. The IP editor probably looked at this, and did exactly what it says: Adding 'Yes', which of course does nothing (it should just be Yes).

That's not very user-friendly. I would suggest to get rid of the inverted commas. They aren't necessary, and just cause confusion when an editor isn't familiar with the syntax. And this isn't about IPs or new users. If I myself came to a template I haven't used before, and it told me I needed to add 'yes' as a parameter, I'd do so, inverted commas included. Especially if the other example (the 1.25, in this case) is not in inverted commas. Renerpho (talk) 23:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 30 June 2024

Description of suggested change: Per what I wrote in Template talk:Infobox planet#'Yes' vs. Yes and Template talk:Infobox planet#Mean radius and mean diameter: Make a small change to the example given for the image_scale parameter (its current form has led to an editor taking it literally, requiring a revert); also, add wiki-links for two parameters in the infobox for which a Wikipedia article has recently been created.

Diff:

−

1.25 increases image size by 25%. 'Yes' reduces to 75% ('upright' image proportions)

+

1.25 increases image size by 25%. ''Yes'' reduces to 75% (''upright'' image proportions)

−

Mean radius {{{mean_radius}}}

+

[[Mean radius]] {{{mean_radius}}}

−

Mean diameter {{{mean_diameter}}}

+

[[Mean diameter]] {{{mean_diameter}}}

Renerpho (talk) 03:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: {{edit template-protected}} is usually not required for edits to the documentation or categories of templates using a documentation subpage. Use the 'edit' link at the top of the green "Template documentation" box to edit the documentation subpage. But a better method would be to use {{para|upright|yes}} which produces |upright=yes, which is unambiguous. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)