Infoboxes
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 articles

Television Template‑class

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 articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Category:Pages using infobox television with unnecessary name parameter tracks articles using |name= matching the article name and therefore unnecessary. Most templates have a name parameter that is usually the same as the article and technically unnecessary, but we don't care about this elsewhere. This category has over 43k articles. I think any attempt to remove the parameter would itself be unnecessary and pointless. I find this cat to distracting when glancing at the list of hidden categories of an article to see it there are actual things to be fixed. Any objection to removing this? MB 02:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you first ask the purpose of the category instead of thinking that it is pointless? There are several reasons to keep it:

• The |name= parameter is one of the highly targeted parameters by vandals to change. The reason for this is it has a very high visibility and in less watched episode articles can be there for a longer period. I'm speaking from experience as someone who has fixed a lot of these.
• The parameter is also misused quite a lot. Editors use the name parameter to either add to it or instead of it alternative titles (which should use |alt_name=) or native titles (which should use |native_name=).
• It also is not updated a lot of times after a page moves or complies with MoS style which results in names being inconsistent throughout the article.
• When eventually cleared from unnecessary name usages, it will be much easier to identify what usages are left and how to handle them correctly.
• Finally, while not as a good reason as the above, it reduces the amount of text in the article which makes editing a cleaner experience.

Just because the category is large is not a reason to remove it. Stuff will be done eventually and it will be empty. Gonnym (talk) 07:02, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the best way to represent the production or air frequency of a show? Some are daily, some are ~weekly (where "weekly" can mean anywhere between 52 to 13 shows per year), some are adhoc / irregular, and they sometimes change over the lifetime of a show... is there some way to show these details using the template? Should we consider a "frequency" attribute or something? //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:47, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That information is better presented in prose. Gonnym (talk) 02:23, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi template editors,

Would it be possible to add module options? As not all TV show or program titles are in English.

Template:Infobox person (data64 to data69) is a good example that allow editors to add up to 6 different modules.

If possible, please add after data51. It would be appreciated by many editors. Thank you. Flipchip73 (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't add random empty parameters. What parameters are you missing? Gonnym (talk) 09:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking to have an option to add miscellaneous module(s). For example, South Korean TV show and program editors usually will include Template:Infobox Korean name at the end of the main infobox. If the width of the main infobox (ie template:Infobox television) changes, the Template:Infobox Korean name would not change in width as both are not linked. Flipchip73 (talk) 11:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you wanting to add the native name of a South Korean show? If so, use |native_name=. Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The parameter |native_name= only shows the native name, wherelse the Template:Infobox Korean name allows editors to include Hangul, Hanja, MR and RR. The template is shown or displayed at the bottom of the main infobox. Flipchip73 (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox, and the article in general, should not translate the name of the show into each language in the world, or even each language the show was broadcast at. It should list two names - the English name and a native name, if not in English. Gonnym (talk) 16:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gonnym,

Nevermind, adding 12 lines of code seems quite difficult for you, I will stick to the template:infobox to work with. It is painful to use, but less troublesome with typing. I'm not angry with you, just that I'm unable to convince you. Have a good day and thank you for your time. Flipchip73 (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flipchip73, I found Those Who Cross the Line which was coded with a manual infobox to replicate {{Infobox television}}. Please to not do this. If there is a project consensus to change the infobox in any way, the changes would obviously not be reflected in this article. I changed the article to use the approved infobox. Please to the same in other articles that have a cloned infobox. I also removed all the collapsed info per MOS:COLLAPSE. Please follow the WP:MOS. MB 17:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the standard |module=, which is found in many infoboxes and can be used to embed child infoboxes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I've reverted. Establish consensus for the change. Clearly there wasn't one here yet. Gonnym (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those Who Cross the Line is great example of a what not to do. Gonnym (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is controversial or harmful about having a |module= parameter so that people can embed child infoboxes as needed? This parameter is used uncontroversially in many infoboxes. Template editors should not revert other template editors' harmless changes without a good reason. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure mean, template editors that see an ongoing discussion which has no consensus should not boldy edit it anyways. {{Infobox television}} will not need any nested infoboxes like some other infoboxes do. A |module= parameter is also a open invitation for editors to add any garbage they want. A need should arise before a change is done. So far the need for a native title is already handled by |native_name=. Gonnym (talk) 20:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a parameter called "IMDb-id" to this template so that it can be linked to its corresponding page in IMDb website. Mohammad ebz (talk) 06:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is definitely inappropriate as it is not a reliable source at all. IMDb can only considered as an External link at the bottom of an article which is {{IMDb title}} — YoungForever^(talk) 07:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What does it have to do with the accuracy of the information source ?, it is just an external link; If so, Wikipedia is also unreliable. The IMDb website is a center for movie and series information and is improved by its users almost like a wiki.

I suggested it only because the breadth and popularity of the IMDb website on the Internet is great and it is better to put it in the information box. (I have nothing to do with the accuracy and precision of the information contained in IMDb) Mohammad ebz (talk) 07:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most external links other than the websites were removed from the infobox years ago. Gonnym (talk) 10:16, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there still a worthwhile reason to include these in the infobox? I don't see the benefit to featuring any sort of website in the infobox when the External links section is perfectly sufficient for them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:52, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but I'd be inclined to lean towards keeping them. Most of the "Arts and culture" infoboxes use it (although "film" does not). Also, the resulting maintenance category to remove it would be significant - it would probably need a bot to clean up. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]