Template talk:Infobox racehorse

regex

Here is the regex I used to do most of the cleanup: s/{{Thoroughbred racehorse infobox\r\| ?Horse Name\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Image\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Sire\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Dam\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Damsire\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Sex\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Foaled\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Country\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Colour\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Breeder\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Owner\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Trainer\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Record\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Prizemoney\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Race\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Year/s\s+= ?(.+)\r\| ?Edit date\s+= ?(.+)\r}}/{{Thoroughbred racehorse infobox\r| name = \1\r| image = \2\r| caption = \r| sire = \3\r| dam = \4\r| damsire = \5\r| sex = \6\r| foaled = \7\r| country = \8\r| colour = \9\r| breeder = \10\r| owner = \11\r| trainer = \12\r| record = \13\r| prize money = \14\r| honors = \r| race = \15\r| year = \16\r| statistics date = \17\r}}/

Cleanup??

I think that Handicappers request for assistance may have been slightly misinterpreted. The change has done away with the Major Wins heading and the race details that follow. Each infobox has now been stripped of much of the information that it was seeking to convey. I think that Handicapper was looking for an additional heading of "Honours" to be added underneath the Major wins section. (dark horse 06:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Latest version

I did another version today that can be seen at Slew o'Gold. I'd still prefer to have the two bottom boxes without subtitles, just whatever text inserted fit automatically left or centered. However, I have no idea how to do that. Comments and improvements please before utilizing/replacing. Handicapper 19:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting bug

Theres an odd formatting bug visible at Sceptre (horse). This horse has 'race' set but not 'awards' or 'honors'. The template inserts an additional blank paragraph above the article. If you put anything in awards, or honors; or take away the race parameter, this misformatting goes away. I had a look at the templates (about which I know nothing - can you make your own to test them?) and the only thing that struck me as odd was this line:

#if:{{{race|}}}{{{awards|}}}{{{honours|}}}...

... every other occurence of pipe symbols is surrounded by <includeonly> tags, these 3 are left alone. Should they have them too? --Bazzargh (talk) 00:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the above problem -- Zafonic (talk) 10:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Updated" parameter

Is there any objection to removing this parameter? It seems unrealistic to expect users to update it manually whenever the page is revised. Until I edited them recently, several hundred pages were using templates that would display the current time the user is viewing the page as the time that the page was "last updated," which obviously doesn't make sense and only serves to falsely assure the user that the page is up-to-date when it actually may be missing recent information. I haven't noticed this parameter in any infobox except for those related to horse racing. Propaniac (talk) 14:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AS far as I'm concerned, the template is needed but not the time of day. You should not arbitrarily delete Templates in use for years without full discussion. In this case, go ahead a create a new Template sans Time of day and the old ones will be replaced over time. Thanx. Handicapper (talk) 15:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand you correctly, and I really want to make sure I do, you're saying that the infobox should continue to say "This infobox was last updated today" (displaying the date that the user is viewing the page), even if the infobox hasn't actually been updated for months; you just think that it shouldn't display the exact time that the user is viewing the page. I'm sorry, but I really don't see why displaying the date makes any more sense than displaying both the time and date. Either way, it's simply false information, because it's not actually showing the date that the infobox was last updated. It doesn't actually tell the user anything; it would be more beneficial to simply insert gobbledygook text, because at least then you wouldn't be lying to the user. Propaniac (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When used appropriately (such as on the tremendously widely deployed {{infobox football biography}}) this is a very useful maintenance parameter. If it's being misused with {{CURRENTDATE-plain}} or the like then that should be addressed directly by removing the incorrect template and educating those who are misusing it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do users actually habitually update the timestamp when they update the player's information? Make no mistake, I absolutely agree that it would be useful for the infobox to note when the information was last updated; I just haven't seen any page using this infobox where that actually happens. If users actually take the initiative to manually maintain the parameter on the football pages, consider me happily surprised. If anyone were able to link me to one or several articles using this infobox where that parameter is manually maintained, that would be even better.

One of my motivations for suggesting removal of the parameter was User:Handicapper's insistence (despite my efforts to convince him otherwise) on filling the parameter with the currentdate templates, which I consider wrong and damaging. Since I posted the suggestion here, Handicapper has (if I understand our User talk conversations correctly) recognized that the currentdate templates do not achieve the purpose he thought he did, and agreed that they should not be used. So as far as I know, the parameter will now just be left blank, making the need to remove it less dire in my view. I'd still rather remove it if there's no indication that it's being used correctly or ever will be, though. Propaniac (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't particularly mind its removal. I can vouch for its effectiveness in football biographies, but that's possibly as much due to the diligence of the editors in that part of the project as anything else. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes: microformats

I made some improvements to this template yesterday; {Handicapper reverted them, marking his revert as a minor edit - it was far from that. He says on my talk page:

I reversed your modifications […] as 1) I don't understand its purpose or value, and 2) out of courtesy, such a change should have first been put up for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thoroughbred racing.

Firstly the changes we documented in edit summaries and this template's own documentation (which was not reverted). Secondly, this is a wiki; there is no requirement to obtain prior permission to make edits; especially edits which implement metadata for which there as been consensus across Wikipedia for years.

To be clear: the edits cause the template to display, in the bottom line, the vernacular, or common, name ("Horse") and scientific name of the species; and to emit a microformat containing that data. This tells things like search engines and other tools that the page is about a Horse. For more on microformats, see the microformats project. Accordingly, I've restored the changes. I'm happy to explain further; that's what this page is for. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only equine related infobox that has the scientific name at the bottom of the infobox (others have documentation remaining, but the code was reverted way back in 2010). Search engines may have needed that technology in 2010, but now it seems superfluous as the articles always identify the horses as Thoroughbred race horses. Either way no one has complained in three years that the other horse infoboxes don't have the species name or that searches are not able to locate the article, which makes me think the inclusion is not important. This issue was brought up during an FA review with one reviewer saying the species inclusion should be reevaluated. I'll revert if no objections. Froggerlaura ^ribbit 05:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By a similar vein, wouldn't all infoboxes on people have to be labeled Human, Homo sapiens sapiens to aid searching? Froggerlaura ^ribbit 05:08, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given that this and the infobox named horse are both about individual animals, I think I agree. The species makes sense for the horse breeds infobox, but not here. Montanabw^(talk) 17:52, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The species name should be restored; since it informs our readers. This may have been the only horse infobox with such content (others should have it), but boxes for other species have the equivalent. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing, Andy. I - and I think everyone - are more than OK with the species being in infoboxes such as {{Infobox horse breed}} where it is logical. (see Thoroughbred). And of course the hrose taxobox is at horse (of course, of course). But these two named horse infoboxes are "biographies." Just like we don't put homo sapiens on Richard Nixon, we don't really seem to need species on the equine "biographies" like Phar Lap either. I think that is my primary understanding, and it was Froggerlaura's explanation that made sense to me here. I'd feel the same about a species parameter being OK on Rough Collie but not at Lassie. does that make sense?Montanabw^(talk) 23:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minor code changes

I added the alternative to use simply "name" rather than "horsename". The fact that this is the name of the horse should be clear. Let me know if this is a problem. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alt text parameter

I've seen a parameter for alt text in a number of other infoboxes, and would like to add one for this infobox also.--Miniapolis (talk) 17:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as this particular infobox handles images by requiring the editor to provide the full image syntax, i.e. |image=[[File:Example.jpg|240px]], as opposed to having separate parameters for each item used to specify the image, you can specify the image alt text by adding the relevant parameter inside that, i.e. |image=[[File:Example.jpg|200px|alt=A brown horse]].

If that is not considered to be user-friendly, I've amended the infobox to allow an alternative form, where an image is described using three parameters

|image_name=

|image_size=

|image_alt=

Date of death parameter

Anyone else feel (as I do) that a death-date parameter would be useful and appropriate? Miniapolis (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this too. Is there a (horse-) cultural reason for this? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No "cultural" reason; I suspect it is more because many horses' dates of death are simply not recorded, even being famous doesn't guarantee such records are kept, particularly on the pre-1900 animals ... Montanabw^(talk) 18:19, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, should we add one? Success Express could use it. --Jeremyb (talk) 13:13, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No objection here so long as no one screws up the rest of the template in doing so. Montanabw ^(talk) 18:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done as |death_date=. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:34, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Project and template rename

Now that we are renaming the project to WikiProject Horse racing, we should rename and transclude this template too, but I don't know how to do it, so someone else needs to. I recommend it simply be named "Template:Infobox race horse" or racehorse (don't care which). May need to tweak the /doc subpage too. Montanabw^(talk) 20:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming a template is easy. You just move it, and then edit the pre-existing redirects (in this case there is only one: Template:Thoroughbred racehorse infobox) so that they point at the new name. Then you move the subpages of the template. Don't worry about fixing articles, leave them showing {{infobox thoroughbred racehorse}}, per WP:NOTBROKEN. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems to all be fixed now either by my redoes or someone else (you responded two hours after I started work, and someone else is now helping.) So at this point, I'm not doing anything further.Montanabw^(talk) 00:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Record parameter format

The record parameter contains four numbers, in the format "T: W-P-S ".

As someone with some experience in horse-racing, I guessed and then verified the meaning of the four values. Shouldn't there be a link or a tool-tip to explain the format, though, given that this is a general knowledge encyclopedia?
There doesn't seem to be any format checking. Wouldn't individual params for the total, wins, places, and shows be better, and also allow for tooltips on the individual values? (Alternatively, this could be done with some parsing of the single-parameter, too.)

—[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New/changed parameters?

@RexxS:I still can't figure out how to properly add parameters, but when editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_Harvester

I discovered that it might be useful to add two parameters: one for "birth_name" and one either called "othername" or "alt name" I also recommended this for {{Infobox named horse}}

Many horses have their birth names changed; (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paynter_(horse) was originally named MC's Dream.) Also, many famous horses had well-known nicknames, (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_o%27_War was "Big Red" , etc...) plus some horses imported between nations and some Olympic-level horses may go through multiple name changes, especially Thoroughbreds who come off the track and are retrained to a different discipline where name changes are allowed.

Another question: Infobox named horse has no color streak at the top, neither does {{Infobox horse breed}} Seems to be the wave of the future. Should we consider eliminating the tan banner at the top of this template too? We will need to keep some color for the dividing sections to make them clear, but....?

Comments? Thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 07:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the parameters should be |former name= and |nickname=? the displayed labels could be pluralised thus: Former name(s). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

adding |birth_name=, |former_name= and |nickname= seems reasonable (or |other_names=). as does removing the tan banner. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever works. "Other names" is probably needed, though it's not always a "former" name other than the birth name - not all horses have nicknames (most do, though some cannot be uttered in mixed company), occasionally there is a name change after a horse becomes famous (see my example of Totilas on the other page). The usual situation with a racehorse is that he gets some sort of tentative name when first registered as a young horse, and then may get a new, sexier name just beore he begins racing, and that will be the name he remains stuck with for life. Occasionally, a horse might get one more name change if they find themselves in an alternative discipline, such as show jumping, where you can name a horse anything you want. So, famous horse Foo was named Babyfoo when he was originally registered, which was changed to Foo before his first race because babyfoo was kind of wimpy, but his barn nickname was still Foofie. Now, he was a special case, because after he retired from the track due to lameness he went to a dude ranch where he was named FUBAR until he singlehandedly saved a small child by racing away from a raging forest fire, after which he was given a gold medal and restored to his former glorious name. LOL! Per the discussion at the other template, I'm OK with the concept of keeping things pretty similar. Montanabw^(talk) 23:46, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That horse sounds very notable; you should write an article about him. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:38, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 18:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(copying from my talkpage) This is a common issue with Hong Kong racehorses who are usually imported and renamed: Military Attack used to be "Rave" for instance. Also there are lots of examples of horses who ran under "descriptive" names before being officially named. Orwell was "the Golden Hair colt"; Ladas (horse) (a WP:GA) was "the Illuminata colt" etc. Owners used to be able to rename horses whenever they liked: "Lerins" became My Babu, the 1826 Oaks winner raced as both "Lilias" and "Babel", the 1791 St Leger winner was Young Traveller/Lauderdale. The last two of these show why "former name" wouldn't work as they both had their names changed after their most notable wins. Just this year, the American-bred Ron The Greek appeared under the name Wattani for one race before apparently reverting to his original name. "Other names" or "also known as" look like a good solutions. Tigerboy1966 10:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LOLs all around. My personal favorite was Alcock's Arabian also known as "Bloody Buttocks" (probably because he was a flea-bitten Gray (horse). So, what SHOULD we name the parameter? Should we have "birth name", "nickname(s)" and "other name(s)"? Don't have to use them all. Montanabw^(talk) 18:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and while we are at it, is there a command or parameter where the heading "Honours" in the Jockey/Horse racing personality infobox can be rendered in US English? We can tweak the parameter itself, but not the header bar, as noted, for example, at Pat Day. Montanabw^(talk) 18:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Modules

I've enabled up to six modules (e.g. child infoboxes) in the template. The first three (|module=, |module2=, |module3=) will appear before "Major wins" and the latter three (|module4=, |module5=, |module6=) at the bottom of the infobox. I've checked on a number of current articles using this infobox that it has no unwanted effect. If there are any problems found, please ping me and I'll revert the additions or fix the problem. If this works in a stable manner, I'll update the documentation then. --RexxS (talk) 18:19, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re Modules - Infobox racehorse - Infoboxmodule Standardbred additions

The Infobox racehorse is just one of the Templates created and designed for Thoroughbred racehorses in either flat or steeplechase racing. There are no infoboxes for Standardbred racehorses & racing. This new Standardbred Infoboxmodule setup needs changes to present the four new items in different locations to be sequentially relevant in the same way the Thoroughbred one does. As it stands, the module leaves the Thoroughbred articles using this new box intact in terms of its presentation. However, the additions for Standardbreds is discombobulated and makes for a confusing presentation as well as reading for any editor or viewer who knows even a litle bit about the harness horse industry or anyone who simply looks at or edits a Wikipedia Thoroughbred horse article.

Possible alternative 1

The previous and current racehorse Infobox design is such that any unused item, except those in the Infoboxmodule Standardbred, simply don't show up on the article page. It makes sense to drop the modules and make it all suitable for universal use -- along with these minor adjustments:

"record" to "race record" - will help define it as meaning only Starts: 1-2-3
Drop "discipline" - it is a term very rarely, if ever, used within harness racing and can cause confusion. Perhaps there is need for this or another distinct item relative to Thoroughbred Steeplechasing.

This is how such a new consolidated setup would look for Thoroughbreds & Standardbreds:

Infobox racehorse

| horsename =
| image=
| image_caption =
| breed =
| gait =
| discipline = (delete this)
| sire =
| grandsire =
| dam =
| damsire =
| sex =
| foaled=
| death-date =
| country =
| color =
| breeder =
| owner =
| driver =
| trainer =
| groom =
| race record = (modified)
| mile record =
| wins =
| earnings =
| awards =
| honors

Possible alternative 2

Standardbreds need a proper Template that is easy to decipher and, like the current one in use for all types of Thoroughbred racing, is readily identifiable. User:White Arabian Filly has put in a lot of effort in this regard and has a nearly-finished Template for Standardbreds here that can easily be finalized by a Template Editor.

Thanks. Mateusz K (talk) 00:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I support adding more logical parameters. I am adamantly opposed to creating a bunch of different horse racing infoboxes. I think that additional parameters for the horse racing infobox can make it work. The word "discipline" may be a good one to re-examine, but the idea is whether we have a flat racing horse, a steeplechaser, a pacer, a trotter or whatever. Any parameters not used just don't show up on the page, and we can add hidden text instructions to indicate some of the biggies. I definitely want a template editor to work with us on this one, so that we don't accidentally screw up 10,000 racehorse articles already using it. Note we also need to add (or re-add) a "| jockey = " parameter Montanabw^(talk) 00:47, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that RexxS has done just the thing: {{Infoboxmodule Standardbred}} has all the parameters, and we can add more if needed. Applied at Dan Patch as an example. Yay! Montanabw^(talk) 20:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In its present form the Infobox racehorse is getting close, but still not acceptable. As per the sample box above, the "Gait" must be immediately below "Breed". That is a basic and integral design element in all professional presentations and individuals reading Wikipedia expect to see either Trot or Pace immediately after Breed and not have to look around to find it as though it were an afterthought. So, I will request RexxS do this. Mateusz K (talk) 00:13, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the {{Infoboxmodule Standardbred}} just has to go the way it goes. I'm afraid if we put "gait" as a parameter in the main box, some person will feel the need to put "gallop" in 7,000 Thoroughbred articles... it looks like this

| module = {{Infoboxmodule Standardbred | gait = | driver = | mile_record = | groom = }} I don't think we can move "gait" to appear anywhere else. But if anyone can, it would be RexxS. Montanabw^(talk) 21:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I can get it to appear anywhere you want. It's just that if you want "professional presentations", then "basic and integral design elements" – like the position of the parameters when displayed – need to specified before the coding, not afterwards. It would have been helpful if the list of parameters required had been marked up as "this is also the order we want them displayed" if that actually is the case. I've applied a work-around that you can see at Dan Patch. I'm now wondering whether rather than having multiple sub-modules, it might be better to create a wrapper template called {{Infobox Standardbred}} that calls just the required parameters of {{Infobox racehorse}} and adds the extra ones directly. --RexxS (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me an example of that? Is that set up so that when the main infobox changes the wrapper does too? Montanabw^(talk) 23:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Full group

We need to add a couple more articles to the see also here, specificially the link to infobox horseracing personality. Montanabw^(talk) 00:35, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For articles about horses

{{Infobox named horse}}
{{Infobox racehorse}}

For articles about breeds and colors

{{Infobox horse breed}}
{{Infobox horse color}}

Template-protected edit request on 2 May 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I'd like to add the option for birth and death places to this template, like I did with Template:Infobox named horse. Just a simple conversion like this (wikitext inserted below):

| label9       = Foaled

| data9        = {{br separated entries|{{{foaled|}}}|{{{birth_place|}}}}}

| label10      = Died

| data10       = {{br separated entries|{{{death_date|}}}|{{{death_place|}}}}}

Star Garnet (talk) 19:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Template:Infobox racehorse/sandbox for proposed revision. Star Garnet (talk) 13:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems straightforward. Why use birth_place rather than foaled_place? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter to me (the heading 'birth place' won't appear on the infobox), but it's been the common language across WP, including Infobox Animal. Star Garnet (talk) 16:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just seemed weird to have the two different terms next to each other. I don't know anything about racehorses - what is the more natural term? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: Edited to "foaled_place" for consistency. Star Garnet (talk) 19:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 25 May 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Pleae add foaled_place and death_place in the Check for unknown parameters invocation. The parameters were added in May 2020 but the check has not been updated, resulting in some articles being incorrectly listed at Category:Pages using infobox racehorse with unknown parameters. Aithus (talk) 00:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Izno (talk) 01:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add links

Some of the parameters should be wiki-linked as they are not common terms (Dam, Damsire, Sire, Grandsire, Jockey) --FMSky (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]