Template talk:Infobox short story

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

WikiProject iconBooks Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. For guidelines on this template's usage, see its documentation.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconNovels Template‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis template has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media type[edit]

The creator of the template highlighted to me that the guidance for this included "anthology" as an option for this field. However "Anthology" is a statement of type of collection, not media for delivery. "Anthology" is a type of collection which can be delivered, via a number of media types. Print or Online, although usually print and usually in book form. We doo need to be clear what is what when we use fields. If we need to use the designation " anthology" that would more naturally go in a qualification to the "released_in" i.e. "[[Sample title]] (short story collection)" or "[[Sample title]] (short story anthology)". Or maybe we need a new field for this information, it just isn't a media-type. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That does make sense, actually - I added a new field for this information, called "publication_type". both pieces of information are useful, so I thought we should include both in this infobox. Let me know what you think! -Elizabennet | talk 20:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Could this template also be used for poems? Personally, I'd think it'd fit well. Thoughts? -Elizabennet | talk 21:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only key problem I can see is that is says "short story". A redirect would not be satisfactory either. perhaps a copy to a new name. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


How should preceded_by and followed_by be used? To link to other stories in a series (possibly by other authors), if any — or any other stories by this story's author?

In a series - not just an author's list :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parameter changes[edit]

In response to the last set of changes to "released_in", "release_date", and "english_release_date", I have tried to make everything consistent but using the "pub" element instead. The old parameters still work but are deprecated. These new ones should be used and the documentation should reflect these changes. Also the pattern template for this usage has been revised, which hadn't been done. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blank lines[edit]

This template appears to be inserting a couple of blank lines before the start of articles it is used in. Have a look at The Black Cat (short story) and The Gift of the Magi. Can this be fixed? --Bruce1ee 13:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The white space appears to have been introduced (somehow) with the edit on 7 June 2007 – but I stand corrected. --Bruce1ee 08:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well spotted, I found the cause and changed it back. I proves that editors need to use a "Lot" of caution when making changes to templates, especially when they are so widely used. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Much better – thank you. --Bruce1ee 08:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double-quote title?[edit]

Shouldn't the short story title be double-quoted instead of italicized? --Bruce1ee 11:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oops my mistake , whilst trying to get the extra spacing removed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has changed it back so - again changed to double quoted as WP:MOS etc. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of italic[edit]

The preceded_by and followed_by parameters are rendered, incorrectly, in italic type. Short story titles should be in roman type enclosed in quotation marks. By the way, why is the first parameter called name rather than title? Finell (Talk) 09:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ital changed to quotes. Nurg (talk) 01:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Place for documentation[edit]

Shouldn't the full documentation of the template's usage (not just the names of the parameters and statement of which are compulsory) be on the template page itself (rather than on this talk page), formatted the same as {{Infobox book}}?? Finell (Talk) 09:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image parameter added[edit]

I've noticed that a few articles on short stories include cover scans, so I added "image" and "caption" parameters. Bryan Derksen (talk) 04:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This should be something at least to discuss first, the original intention of the infobox was to "infobox" particularly for those stories which are not published separately, any short story collection or anthologies would still use the "infobox Book" form. As such these would not have cover arts. In fact this would be so unusualy for "short stories" to have cover art that the best way for consistency would be to not include them and suggest inclusion of art for the sake of it. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And yet in the random sampling of articles I checked through to make sure I wasn't breaking anything, I found a fair number that had cover scans nonetheless - and they looked like appropriate coverscans, too, so simply removing them would detract value from the articles. I don't see why it's better to leave the art tucked away in nonstandard places throughout the article when there's a common convention in infoboxes to have a parameter for an image representing the subject of the infobox up at the top. I think this may be a case of practice overtaking theory. Bryan Derksen (talk) 09:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So if they are "first edition" cover scans then the appropriate infobox would be the "Book" one. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually if this is not clear - and I suspect it is not - then the recent documentation should be improved. The whole point of a separate infobox is for initial publication of the short story, when in a form that does not (in the vast majority of cases) have a cover so no cover art is possible. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally to this I wonder whether what you have been seeing are anthology, collection or even magazine covers. I know some editors have been adding these to short story articles. These can often raise "fair use" copyright issues anyway as they do not directly illustrate the work being discussed. (can't go into fair use here). :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The main example I'm thinking of right now is Runaround, there were others I noticed in my checking but I didn't examine them in depth. The cover of the I, Robot anthology it's in bears a depiction of a scene from that story, so it seems reasonable to include it in the article about the story. If the story had had it as an internal illustration that would have served as its very own "cover". I also don't see why the "vast majority of cases" having no cover art is a problem when implementing an optional parameter, the ones with no cover art will continue on with their infoboxes remaining just as they are now. And any fair use issues will be exactly the same whether the image is in an infobox or elsewhere in the body of the article. Bryan Derksen (talk) 09:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, using that article as an example - two things become clear first the infobox has the "short story" title italicised , which it shouldn't be - minor. The other thing is that the image isn't anything to do with the initial publication which is what the infobox should be about. Also the illustration is for an anthology and if used under fair use rules then it should be "restricted" to illustrating an article about that publication. And thus it highlights some of the main points I am making. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So remove the image. If it needs to go, it needs to go whether it's in the infobox or not. I'm still not really seeing why the infobox shouldn't support the possibility of adding an image to it. If an article about a short story has a valid image in it, it can be put in the infobox. If it has no valid image, it shouldn't be in the infobox or in the article's body. Bryan Derksen (talk) 10:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It has been removed from all but the anthology that it relates to. Your other comment deserves further discussion. I have expressed my view and you yours, we need further input. All I would say further is that the usage of illustrations in articles as a justification of the fields is not in itself valid as many appear to be added on insufficient grounds. The one you arrive at is the one we are left with. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Media entry[edit]

I think that, once used in an article, the media field ends up misleading. Looking at The Bicentennial Man, it looks like its saying that the story itself is a book. This ought to be clarified, somehow. SamBC(talk) 18:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps "In media type" would suffice, we don't want to make the legend too long. We would have to add it as a documented alternative and still support the existing until all examples had been changed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 06:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link to free version?[edit]

Would it make sense to add a field pointing to online texts? For example, both the full text and audio versions of The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate are available for free online. Espertus (talk) 05:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add image tag[edit]

The previous discussion on adding an image tag ended without a firm resolution. I support the adding of such a tag because many short stories are published in a standalone form, even those that are originally in a periodical or collection. It makes no sense for such are to be forced below the infobox (e.g. the cover art in Johnny Mnemonic looks sloppily placed. In addition some short story to have accompanying art included in the larger work (e.g. Jabberwocky, alright I know it's a poem but I couldn't think of a proper example off the top of my head). It also should be noted that though most short stories are not originally published as a standalone work, some are. Since an image tag is never mandatory, providing the option is beneficial.--Marcus Brute (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually already did this last week. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But there was no consensus debate at all and there is little need for cover image in the infobox when if the short story is published standalone then the "Book" infobox would be the one to use. There is only need to use this "Short story" when not published standalone. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And what of short stories which have fitting illustrations aside from a book cover, which would otherwise have to be placed elsewhere on a page? I'm failing to see why even the option of this parameter is verboten; I certainly don't see any consensus for its removal, and it appears that you wouldn't even have noticed that it had been added had I not commented here. The Manual of Style recommends that articles start with a right-aligned lede image. Adding an optional parameter to the infobox helps with that. What's your rationale for why this is actively harmful? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly lack of consistency with the Book infobox which would do the job quite adequately in most published cases. Where the image is for the cover - other illustrations being peppered throughout the article. I see no overwhelming reason for putting images in the infobox for the few cases that might warrant such things. If we add the option all kind of images will get added, I have seen it happen. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-added this, as it's obvious that editors are adding images to the lede of articles concerning short stories outside the infoboxes. Templates should follow common use rather than the other way around. The MOS recommends lede images, infobox templates are widely used, and the two should be able to co-exist happily. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Preceded/Followed by formatting[edit]

There should at least be an option to allow italics rather than quotation marks for preceding and following works, as not all short stories are preceded/followed by other short stories; many are in series with novels, for example. Unless anyone objects, I'll make new parameters (perhaps "preceded by italic"/"followed by italic") to change the formatting. --xensyriaT 23:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: following this, I'd like to bring this template in line with {{Infobox book}} by having the preceded/followed by italics parameters replace preceded/followed by when they're needed, rather than using them as a switch. I've made the changes in the sandbox, but in order to properly migrate existing uses (which won't break under the new template, but won't display with italics either), I'd like to make a temporary test edit to see where there parameters are being used. I'm not sure if this breaches any policies (as it might cause unnecessary work for the server), so I've asked about it here and been advised to raise it on this talk page too. --xensyriaT 22:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With no objections, test and fix done; all (3) articles using italics have been updated. --xensyriaT 14:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource link[edit]

Suggest WS parameter, like {{infobox book}}. Moondyne (talk) 13:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also want this Akeosnhaoe (talk) 03:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quotemarks breaking?[edit]

The quotemarks on the title are liable to break—take a look at The Story of the Three Bears, where the closing quotemark appears on the next line. Can this be fixed? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 21:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Curly Turkey, probably fixed it? let me know if this is still a problem. Frietjes (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, looks great! Thanks a lot! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I suggest changing the preceded by and followed by sections to be similar to infobox:album. You can see a testcase at the bottom of Template:Infobox short story/testcases. Any thoughts or suggestions on this potential edit? Bluealbion (talk) 04:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Title quotation marks[edit]

Titles of short stories should be enclosed in double quotation marks per MOS:QUOTETITLE. Should the template be updated to reflect this? Οἶδα (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me: the title used to be in quotation marks, but looks like it was accidentally changed to italics in this edit earlier this year, and when the italics were removed soon after the quotation marks weren't restored. ‑‑YodinT 11:37, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Collected in"[edit]

How about adding a field "Collected in", for short stories originally published online, in magazines, etc that were later collected in a volume of the author's works? McPhail (talk) 17:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]