Template talk:Infobox television

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox television template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16: 5 months

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Infoboxes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Infoboxes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InfoboxesWikipedia:WikiProject InfoboxesTemplate:WikiProject InfoboxesInfoboxes

Television

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. For how to use this banner template, see its documentation.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision

Template:Infobox television is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

This template was considered for deletion on 2018 December 17. The result of the discussion was "Do not merge".

Adding animation services attribute

I suggest adding an attribute for animation services for animated shows, as opposed to adding non-standard parameters to do that. Raymondsze (talk) 01:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. A number of articles already include them under "animators" or "production companies" or add an attribute for "animation studio" (see The Legend of Korra). An animation studio is comparable, concise, and materially relevant (Help:Infobox#What should an infobox contain?). And it's important information, animation studios do skilled work and it's reflected in the quality of the show. DA39A3 (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with this motion of having an actual attribute for animation services in animated shows instead of removing them completely as a "non-definable" attribute in info-boxes.-Prince Silversaddle (talk) 01:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that it is "Materially relevant to the subject" and it is seldom info that is "Already cited elsewhere in the article" - that supports that it is not materially relevant. This is generally skilled labor work that is implementing the creative output of the production companies listed in "Company". The arguments in the infobox instructions for "Company" really apply to not listing animation services at all in the infobox. If an attribute has not been added by consensus to the standard set, using infobox construction work-arounds to add it as a non-standard attribute for a specific infobox is inappropriate. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template needs to be updated to support night mode

Hi this template doesnt support night theme for transparent images example as it doesn't provide a way for editors to style images either by adding a white background or inverting colors. The [1] is to allow editors to add a class to the image via a template parameter. This is already beimg used in placed like infobox signatures.

Please see my recent attempt to fix this for reference (reverted by User:Gonnym) and application in The_Acolyte_(TV_series) (reverted by User:‪Adamstom.97.‬

This feature is planned for deployment by June 20th so a fix should ideally be applied before then. Thanks in advance for deciding what you want to do about this. I am fixing issues like this at a large scale spanning multiple Wikimedia projects and templates (mostly to raise awareness of this issue) so unfortunately do not have time to discuss on a per-template basis but if you have any general questions you can direct them to the MediaWiki recommendations page.

Thank you! 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 20:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the only way to fix these images is on a per-image fix by adding "skin-invert"? Do all .svg files need this same class? Gonnym (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not always. Qnother solution might be adding a different class to set background to white. The issue also occurs with png images with transparent background - not just svg.

In fact, the quickest fix to consider here is always defining the background as white globally in the template. E.g. .infobox-television img {background:white;}

Another example I came across today:

Fantasmas_(TV_series). 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 15:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So if we define the background as white like you propose above, would this have any other unintentional effect? Gonnym (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be a problem for images that are just white text? - adamstom97 (talk) 05:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are there images that are just white text? They would not show on the current white background, so I suspect there aren't any. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What Jonesy95 says: Images with just white text wouldn't show up in the normal theme so are not a problem. There would be no side effects of such a change other than the image no longer inheriting the background color of the infobox - but that itself would be an accessibility improvement. 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 18:40, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added (I think) the rule to the sandbox version. Please add a test to the /testcases and make sure this works as you want. Gonnym (talk) 18:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LGTM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_television/testcases#Note_about_images 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 05:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paging @User:Gonnym - please go ahead and apply this fix. 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 18:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdlrobson: I've viewed the newly added image to the testcase in dark mode and I don't see any difference between the live template and the sandbox with it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:24, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you viewing it with ?vectordarkmode=1 in the URLs per the instructions? Also please disable the dark mode gadget enabled if you have that on. 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 20:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sandbox loads styles in the examples page that also applies to the non sandbox version so you can't reliably test it in that way. It would be better to edit an article like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Acolyte_(TV_series)?useskin=vector-2022&vectornightmode=1 to use the sandbox to see the difference. 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 20:05, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see that at The Acolyte. Though switching to the sandbox template it produced this error: Lua error in Module:Infobox_television/sandbox at line 140: attempt to compare number with string. So that will need to be investigated before going live if it is something with the CSS. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:17, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The error has nothing to do with it. That's some unfinished code I'm working on (which is why it's on the /sandbox). You can switch the template sandbox to use the live version of the module to test the CSS. Gonnym (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good. The CSS appeared to work as intended, so if that Lua error isn't part of that, then I think this is fine to make live. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Gonnym (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Episode counter

I've recently came across Template:Episode counter which was used in the |num_episodes= field of the infobox of an article. Is this something we want used in articles? Since the infobox should have a consistent look across the wiki, a Korean or reality series shouldn't seem that different. Currently all other articles typically just use a simple number for this. Gonnym (talk) 12:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems a bit excessive. Primefac (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{Episode counter}} is just extraneous details we do not need on the infobox. A simple number is sufficient already for the |num_episodes= parameter. — YoungForever^(talk) 21:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see the need either. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with the above, unnecessary. -- Alex_21_TALK 00:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the template is now removed and not in use in any mainspace article, should it be delete? 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 14:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been nominated for deletion. Primefac (talk) 12:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate field

@Gonnym: In your latest change you added duplicate label54 and related fields. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that. Fixed. Gonnym (talk) 09:21, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Studio section in infobox

Per this talk page discussion, should there be a separate field that lists a studio producing a series live-action or animated? They have nothing to do with production companies, and besides, some shows have logos of companies that are not production companies at all. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference between a studio producing a series and a production company? - adamstom97 (talk) 06:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The studio is responsible for the production of quality of a product, while the production company responsible for supervising the production process. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 21:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand that an animation studio is not a production company. There is a past discussion about not including animation studios in the infobox. Please see Template talk:Infobox television/Archive 14#Parameter clarification. — YoungForever^(talk) 07:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know that an animation studio is a studio in all, not a production company. Plus, even in the live-action field the pipelines of a studio and a production company are different. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 21:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That should only apply to shows that were subcontracted, not the ones that were actually co-productions. - FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 03:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, it's not fair to assume that every animated show like Arthur, the Beetlejuice cartoon, and My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic were subcontracted like The Simpsons and King of the Hill instead of co-production without solid evidence. Because of this unfair new guideline, I can't even watch these shows anymore and I don't mean watching the articles on them. - FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 21:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should the only exception be 20th Television Animation? they are not a subcontractor animation studio. Jediknight15 (talk) 06:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no exception. A company is or is not the studio producing the show. If it is, add it. If it isn't, do not. Gonnym (talk) 06:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

they technically do count on the same grounds as Searchlight Pictures. Jediknight15 (talk) 23:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starring actors

How to determine starring actors? Is it by opening and ending credits or by billing poster or by official website or by reliable sources? What if there's differences between those? This for Korean dramas by the way. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 15:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

US shows have onscreen credits in the opening. If Korean dramas have the same, use that. Gonnym (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's what I'm talking about the onscreen credits.

Thank you Gonnym. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 15:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Gonnym, a follow up question, so is onscreen credits has more WP:WEIGHT than others? I'm asking this as another user have different point of view of how starring cast list should be in Queen of Tears. See my talk page. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 10:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the country, I guess. In the US market, the on screen credits for television productions is what we go by. If Korea does it differently then follow that. However, I would say that I find it strange that they would have a different order on screen and on a poster. Is there a specific example for this? Gonnym (talk) 10:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen of Tears is an example for it, onscreen credits shows the ensemble cast while the poster shows the names of two main actors only. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 11:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And are the first two names from the on screen credits, the same two names from the poster? Gonnym (talk) 12:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's right. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 13:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So there really isn't an issue here. The poster for lack of space lists the 2 top billed cast, the TV episode itself lists the entire cast. They are all starring. Gonnym (talk) 13:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Windborne Rider. I apologize for not noticing this discussion earlier. Starring actors are usually determined by billing poster for Korean dramas, which is why I made the edit. Wheezythewave (talk) 06:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright but as far as I know is that billing poster are mostly use in films rather than in dramas. And that is why I brought up this discussion because of the different approach when there's already a pre-existing guidelines. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I believe it was already discussed back in April that generally only the main cast in the infobox is listed for korean dramas. If you check the other pages as well. Wheezythewave (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dialogues and Lyrics credits

At Category:Temp infobox television tracking category usages of "Dialogues" and "Lyrics" are tracked. As you can see, there are over 400 pages that use this credit. From checking a few, this seems to be an Indian-unique credit. We should either support and add these two credits, or remove their usages. But there is no point in ignoring this and having this incorrect usage style continue. Gonnym (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]