Template talk:Blason-fr-en-it

Return to "Blason-fr-en-it" page.

This template should be updated so that it uses the Information syntax and so that it is substed so that categories etc can more easily be accessed. /Lokal_Profil 17:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Double classifaction and category overpopulationEdit

By this template, all items go correctly in subcategories like category:coats of arms of families of France and category:Coats of arms of cities of France etc., but also wrongly in the higher category:coats of arms of France which has become excessively overpopulated. It is important to correct this template in a way that it generates only a subcategory or generates category:coats of arms of France by absence of a subcategory. Havang 20:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I have removed categorization in category:coats of arms of France and category:Coats of arms of cities of France. You can still find these coats of arms in Category:SVG coats of arms - France (except when ‘nofr’ is specified). --Juiced lemon 21:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree that Coats of arms of France was generally useless, but why delete Coats of arms of cities of France which was populated only if the department was unknown?
I prefered the solution suggested by Havang, which - as I understand - was to keep the higher category (COA of France) only if no lower ones (neither catCOAof nor catSVGCOA) was used, except of course - as you said - when nofr= is specified.
Juiced lemon, can you modify the template again, or would you like me to try, or do you consider your solution is the best possible and cannot be amended? In this last case please modify also the use indications which are now false after your modification of the template.
Regards, Bruno 12:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't the easiest thing be to not have the categories hardcoded into the template? That way anyone (whitout specialist knowledge about this template) could easily add/remove categories as this becomes necessary. Something would obviously have to be done about the already uploaded images but for new ones
[[Category:Coats of arms of XXX]]
[[Category:SVG coats of arms XXX]]
should be just as easy to use as the old template. /Lokal_Profil 14:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Juiced lemon has a point: I uploaded some 200 coat of arms items from nl:wikipedia not kowing of the existence of a template. I discovered the template, because I couldn't delete the wrongly assigned category:coats of arms of items from other users.

The template PD-Coa-Germany is even worse, it generates also the category:Insignia, I have asked to undo that in Template talk:PD-Coa-Germany. It's obvious that for the growing commons user group copyright statements and category assignments should be independent. How many templates of the mixing type exist and who is able to reorganise those templates? Havang 14:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I have removed Category:Coats of arms of cities of France from the template because coats of arms don't specifically regard cities. In the opposite case, Category:Unsorted coats of arms of cities of France would be fine. --Juiced lemon 14:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Juiced lemon, the temp category:coats of arms of France to be classified can serve for that as well. Havang 14:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Obviously «coats of arms don't specifically regard cities». And you could add French cities as well. Coats of arms of cities of France is only a default category which can be easily overriden by using the catCOAof parameter. This template was at first created for a French project when its users created mainly this type of coats of arms, which is still I suppose the case for most of the files based on this template, and that is why this default category was (and is still) useful.
Regarding the "specialist knowledge about this template", I don't understand the objection: if you use a template, at least you can read the use indications given on its page. If these precisions are not clear enough, please feel free to make them clearer. Or just ask for explanations.
If you have ideas to improve the template, this talk page is where we can discuss it. But to make profound modifications on an elaborate template already used on lots of files just because some users do not take the time to read how it should work, without discussing it and without any concern about the impact this modification has on the existing files, seem to me like vandalism.
Regards, Bruno 17:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's why I started discussing templates. The categories coats of arms are so badly organised and I had to search quite some time to discover why. It are the templates that cause so huge items in a categorie, that it's an Hercules-work to restaure the category tree and many users left the job unstarted. First improving the templates so that they not disturb categorisations should make things really easier. Can you propose a workable solution. Havang 18:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
As I said before, I agree with you not to populate Coats of arms of France when one of its subcat (Coats of arms of cities in Yvelines, Coats of arms of families of France, SVG coats of arms - France, etc.) is used, in other words when the template's parameter catCOAof or catSVGCOA is used.
Regarding the organisation of the categories, I am roughly satisfied with the current situation with one main category by country, a subcat by type of owner (families, cities, regions, etc.), and as many sub-subcats as needed. And the opposite as well: one main category by type (all countries mixed), and a subcat by country. The parallel categorisation in SVG coats of arms is useful too when you look for vector files only; it would not be useful anymore if other formats were abandonned but some users seem willing to keep them, so keep the category as well.
I am afraid I didn't give you the workable solution you hoped. Have you a best one? Bruno 21:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Bruno, by pushing the [[Category:]] button on the editing menu, I get what I need - so it never crossed my mind that others have done much thinking in automatizing the [[Category:]] in a template, till I discovered the template by the wrong category assignments it caused. The quite sophisticated nice template is more at risk for mistakes than the [[Category:]] button. Also, it was not obvious how to correct these mistakes: no one corrected, they all let mistakes as they were. That are arguments for taking category assignments out of the template. (Is there a way to do a reversible try-out of this?)Havang 09:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC). Sorry, I forgot: the construction of the categorie tree itself is OKE: the problem is the automatic and difficult to revert redundancy caused by the template. Good sunday Havang 09:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Good evening, Havang, and thanks for your explanations. If you always pushed on the same button to insert always nearly the same category (coats of arms of ...) you would be glad the computer could help you. Anyway, that is the role of a template, isn't it? But I stop arguing with you on this subject: we do not share the same point of view and that is all. If you find a way to modify automatically all the files using this template (or if you have time and health to do it manually) so that their categories will not be altered when you simplify the template, and if you find a way to warn the users that their usual template will not behave as usual from now on, I have no nore objection you try out something. I think it must be a lot of work for so little a benefit, but perhaps I am mistaken and there is a simple way to do it. Tell me if you find it: this may be very useful. Have a nice week, Bruno 22:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I'll have a nice week, I hope, I go to France till the end of september.
  • There is a larger problem with the templates: templates are used within other templates resulting in supplementary redundancies. I found user templates which have built in category templates and build-in copyright templates containing category templates. In those cases category assignments are hard to correct both automatically and manually. It should be useful to analyse the whole bunch of templates.
  • And indeed, an archive system for 1.000.000 pictures, going still up, is not done in a weekend, nor in a one mans week. Improving the templates makes things prettier for those who put free time in improving category trees and categorisations.

Have a nice week too. Havang 08:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

How to remove categories from a template: an exampleEdit

Template:Patent: initially a template with built-in categorization (previous version of Template:Patent)

  1. Template:Patent is renamed Template:PD patents: this doesn't affect the files where Template:Patent is used.
  2. The redirection in Template:Patent is replaced with the inclusion of Template:PD patents: this doesn't affect the files where Template:Patent is used.
  3. I copy the built-in categorization in Template:PD patents to Template:Patent: this doesn't affect the files where Template:Patent is used, because you can add one time or several times a given category to the same file, with an unchanged result.
  4. I remove the built-in categorization in Template:PD patents.

Now, where Template:Patent is used, you can substitute Template:Patent with Template:PD patents, and add proper categories by the classic way. It can be done manually, or with a bot. --Juiced lemon 09:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that this cannot be done directly with this template since it contains IF-statements for the categories leaving loads of junk code on each image page. Althoug I guess it might be possible to program a bot to go through all the images and clean them up afterwards though. Anyhow moving the categories out of the template is important and should be done, that obviously goeas for Template:Blason-fr-en as well. /Lokal_Profil 10:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
As long as you can isolate the piece of code which sets up the categorization, you can apply the method I explained above. --Juiced lemon 11:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem would be that the isolated categorising code would look something like:
{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{DEFAULTSORT:{{{alias}}}}} }}
{{{nofr|[[Category:Coats of arms of France|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]]}}}
{{ #if: {{{catCOAof|}}} | [[Category:Coats of arms of {{{catCOAof}}}|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]] | {{{nofr|[[Category:Coats of arms of cities of France|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]]}}} }}
{{ #if: {{{catSVGCOA|}}} | [[Category:SVG coats of arms {{{catSVGCOA}}}|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]] | {{{nofr|[[Category:SVG coats of arms - France|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]]}}} }}
{{{noink|[[Category:Created with Inkscape|{{ #if: {{{alias|}}} | {{{alias}}} |zzz no alias }}]]}}}
The problems with this is that when you move it out of the template all of the parameters will disapear so the only possibility is to move all the other non-categorising code to another template, then include that template as part of this template and then subst this template. Now the problem becomes that when you subst this template then you get something like

{{ #if: Brou | {{DEFAULTSORT:Brou}} }}
{{ #if: cities in Eure-et-Loir | [[Category:Coats of arms of cities in Eure-et-Loir|{{ #if: Brou | Brou |zzz no alias }}]] }}
{{ #if: {{{catSVGCOA|}}} | [[Category:SVG coats of arms {{{catSVGCOA}}}|{{ #if: Brou | Brou |zzz no alias }}]] | {{{nofr|[[Category:SVG coats of arms - France|{{ #if: Brou | Brou |zzz no alias }}]]}}} }}
{{{noink|[[Category:Created with Inkscape|{{ #if: Brou | Brou |zzz no alias }}]]}}}
Which although it has moved the categories out of the template (and new images could use the second template with "normal" category tags) it leaves a lot of junk code on every page, junk code which would need to be cleaned up by a bot.
Anyhow it can all be done but not as easily as for Template:Patent. /Lokal_Profil 13:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I have used 'substitute' according its general meaning. When you replace a template with another one, and add proper categories in a media file, you ignore the piece of code. --Juiced lemon 14:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that there is no way of ignoring this piece of code without loosing all the category information from the images using the template. I'm not saying that a substitution cannot be done I'm just saying that it's not the same easy process as for Patent and that there will be lots of junk code left on the image pages (although non will be visible except when editing the page) unless someone manages to program a bot to clean it up. /Lokal_Profil 19:23, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Harmonisation with {{information}}Edit

Hi, here is a proposal of template aimed at replacing the current one by something more harmonized with {{information}} and current language templates: see {{COAInformation}}.
If this new one is OK for everyone, we could eventually redirect the current template to the new one.
Best regards from France,
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 13:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

By the way, an example of usage can be found here:

Image:Blason famille fr Baglion de Baguelin.svg

-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 13:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks good except for two things. The first is that source should probably be changed to sourcefr since all other french parameters go by this ending. the second thing is the category part, for the same reason as above I think that part is better left outside the template. Similar to before one could then use:
[[Category:Coats of arms of XXX]]
[[Category:SVG coats of arms - XXX]]
And replace XXX by the suitable parameters. This is no more work then specifying "alias=", "catCOAof=" and "catSVGCOA=" and it means that categories can later on easily be fixed/edited by anyone including bots and people who aren't aware of how the COAInformation template works./Lokal_Profil 13:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestions.
Actually, I think that replacing source by sourcefr should be the first thing to do, with the help of some bot (there are about 1000 images using the current template). Then the new template would be updated.
For the category part, this could be done after the template change...
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 14:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for tackling this problem; there could be a Category:XXX as well, I think, for locality or family or other side category outside the coats-tree. Havang 15:39, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Well part of the idea was that if category question is solved now then it's easier to deal with once this template is replaced by a bot. Same thing goes for source -->sourcefr. No need to update the images now when a bot can update that at the same time as it updates the template being used.
As you said there can very well be more general categories (families, military regiments, parishes etc.) once again by having the category info outside the template this is easily adapted to suit the situation. The above was more a suggestion for what people can copy-paste onto the image page. /Lokal_Profil 09:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
If we're depreciating source is there any need to include it at all in the new template? Isn't it better to just allow sourcefr right from the start? /Lokal_Profil 09:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


Français : {{COAInformation/fr}} a été créé pour remplacer {{Blason-fr-en-it}}, tandis que {{COAInformation}} n'est plus spécifique du Projet:Blasons-fr.
English: {{COAInformation/fr}} has been created to replace {{Blason-fr-en-it}}, while {{COAInformation}} is no more specific to the fr-Blazon Project.

Zigeuner 21:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Before switching to a new template...Edit

Hi, the source parameter is now deprecated in both templates.
Any opposition right now to switch to the new template ?
Best regards from France,
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 10:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd still recommend reaching an agrement on the categorisation first so that we only need to run the bot once. I think it's probably also a good idea to drop a message on fr:Projet:Blasons (I'll leave this to someone who is fluent in French) and get some input from the people who are the main users of this template. /Lokal_Profil 13:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Also when we do switch we should probably take Template:Blason-fr-en and Template:Heraldic-figure-fr (and possibly Template:Blason-xx) along for the ride. /Lokal_Profil 13:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I think you're wrong about the category point, I mean that we can do the categorization change at any time, because:
  • it depends on the template only for the images using the template
  • images that don't use this template would have to be edited anyway (now or after the template switching) by a bot.
I proposed the change to the French project and wait for enough imput here.
I'm checking what can be done for the other templates: I think the less templates exist, the best it is :)
Thanks for your constructive comments and best regards!
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 08:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
But by making a descission now the bot only has to go over the images once (i.e. can fix the category situation as the same time as it converts to the nwe template). Also by sorting it out now we make sure that it actually gets fixed and not just postponed into the unknown future. /Lokal_Profil 17:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about {{COAInformation}}Edit

Les utilisateurs de ce modèle étant principalement francophones, et moi itou, je préfère discuter en français.
Je ne me prononcerai pas sur la nécessité d'harmoniser le modèle avec {{Information}}. Autant je partage le souci d'harmonisation, autant je reste attaché à l'apparence de notre bon vieux modèle Blason-fr-en-it. Donc, je suis neutre quand à ce point. Aux autres de donner leur avis là-dessus.

  • En revanche, je partage l'avis d'Ash Crow : le blasonnement doit être mis en exergue, avec une case particulière "Blazon".
  • Je serais aussi intéressé par dédoubler la case "source", en indiquant celle du dessin (own work, etc.), en faisant une autre case "Blazon source" indiquant la(s) source(s) d'où est extrait le blasonnement, qui est une information capitale. Cela lèverait une ambiguïté : quand on indique en face de source "Gaso.fr", on pourrait croire que c'est l'image qui provient de ce site, alors qu'il ne s'agit que du blasonnement.
  • Autre aspect qui me semble important : ajouter une option (encore...) ajoutant la phrase "dessiné pour le projet blason de la wikipedia francophone", qui n'apparaîtrait donc pas par défaut. Cela permettrait que ce modèle soit vraiment universel pour tous les blasons, ce qui permettrait une réelle unité.

Voilà je crois l'essentiel de mon avis. Zigeuner 14:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

English summary Should be added : a row "Blazon" and a row "Blazon source".
"made for the Blazon Project of French-speaking Wikipedia." should only appear if wanted. Zigeuner 14:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


The template should not categorize directly to Created with Inkscape. It should use instead the template prepared for that, and use the tagging: {{Inkscape|v}} (assumed that the files are W3C-valid - else use {{Inkscape|err=number from W3C-validation}}). This enables a diffused categorizing, there are 72 000 files in the category.
Better create an own Armoiries-subcategory to Valid SVG created with Inkscape, I am just expanding {{Inkscape}} for this service: there are more than 7000 armoiries, to remove them from the overcrowded main category. It is possible with a little change in this template. Can I help something with that? sarang사랑 18:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Last modified on 11 April 2014, at 20:37