Template talk:Floruit

"Hover" gloss isn't really helpful except to forgetful Latin students

The gloss the user gets when hovering over the fl. is flourit. I think it's an extremely narrow class of readers who don't know what fl. means, but when reminded it's short for flourit, thinks, "Ah yes! That clears things up." Perhaps we should add something more explicit, in English e.g. something like

flourit (flourished -- that is, known to have been alive between the given dates)

(though that's isn't quite satisfactory). EEng (talk) 19:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main benefit of expanding to floruit, I think, is that it's easier to Google than fl. Pburka (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why set our sights so low? Why not tell the reader what the symbol means, instead of a offering a clue for them to further research? EEng (talk) 22:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying we can't do better. I'm only saying that it is helpful. Pburka (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the point at hand... any thoughts on the hover text I suggested? EEng (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned that the proposed explanation isn't accurate. fl. is often used with a single date, and it typically means that the person (or organization) was active, rather than just alive. Perhaps "floruit (known to have been active around this time)". Pburka (talk) 00:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the "around" part is a separate concept -- I vaguely recall seeing fl. c. 1216 here and there. How about

floruit ("flourished"—known to have been active at a particular time or during a particular period)

EEng (talk) 01:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Pburka (talk) 03:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recoding and doc update proposal

A recoding of this template and accompanying updated documentation is now at at the sandbox. It is proposed that the new version become live around March 1. 72.43.99.146 (talk) 01:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Parentheses option

A boolean option (~~|brackets=yes~~ |b=yes) was added to template:floruit/sandbox today to display the template's output in parentheses if there is a value to date. I am not certain if WP:MOS has anything to say about such display. Option is proposed to become live if it doesn't run contrary to style. 72.43.99.146 (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could not find any guidelines on brackets for floruit dates. Added the option and updated the doc. 72.43.99.146 (talk) 14:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of unnecessary parameters

I added some tracking categories a few weeks ago, and I have yet to see any movement or usage of the more... esoteric parameters offered by the IP-edited version of this template. Thus, I have reverted to a "simple" version.

The added parameters were unused, but more importantly they were unnecessary. For example, there was no need for a "suffix" parameter, when the first parameter could just as easily handle the full text. Nor was there for a "unit" (same reasoning). Primefac (talk) 16:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge for new metatemplate features?

FYI

– Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see proposed merger (leaving behind a wrapper at the original template name): Template talk:Reign:Overhauled, and basically a meta-template – maybe merge some stuff?
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 04:42, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template_talk:Reign#Overhauled.2C_and_basically_a_meta-template_.E2.80.93_maybe_merge_some_stuff.3F. Primefac (talk) 14:59, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting

I think the second line of the template:

 |<span style="display:none;">{{{1|}}}</span>

needs replacing with:

 |<span style="display:none; speak:none;">{{padleft:{{{1|}}}|4|0}} </span>

as seen in {{circa}}

"speak:none" ought to overcome the issue with screen readers, but I've not researched that in detail.
"{{padleft:{{{1|}}}|4|0}}" will prefix shorter years with zeros. At the moment 410 sorts after 1956 since 4>1. Using padleft will insert 0410 as the year for sorting on. See circa as mentioned above. Of course this fix will only work until 9999, to be Y10K compliant see RFC 2550 :-) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:11, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a good reason to support the proposed template merger (see above). Pburka (talk) 17:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Circa

Currently, {{floruit|1172|1230}} generates fl. 1172 – c. 1230. But this is wrong. When giving a date range as a floruit, those are the earliest and latest dates of attestation. There is nothing "circa" about the second date. Srnec (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. In fact if you want a non-circa'd range, you should simply write {{floruit|1172–1230}}, which generates fl. 1172–1230. I think that if you want a circa'd range, that should be spelled more like {{floruit|c=1172–1230}} or {{floruit|circa|1172–1230}} or something along those lines. I'll be trying to accomplish something like this for {{died-in}} in the next few minutes. (Edit a few minutes later: {{died-in|c|1230}} now produces d. c. 1230.) --Quuxplusone (talk) 18:49, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And a few minutes later: Actually, {{floruit|{{c.|1172–1230}}}} does exactly the right thing — fl. c. 1172–1230 — so I'm removing my |c| parameter from {{died-in}}. --Quuxplusone (talk) 19:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]