Jump to content

Template talk:Bibleref2: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 1: Line 1:
== Default ==

Why is the default TNIV? Wouldn't it be better to go to NET Bible or a similar (more impartial) resource? NET bible for example displays a range of translations automatically for any single Bible verse.
Why is the default TNIV? Wouldn't it be better to go to NET Bible or a similar (more impartial) resource? NET bible for example displays a range of translations automatically for any single Bible verse.


Line 41: Line 43:


Is this template intended for use in the body of articles? If so, it seems in clear violation of [[WP:ELPOINTS|ELPOINTS]] 2 (for which "exceptions are rare"), and the suppression of the arrow symbol further obscures the fact that external links are being used in-text. If it is only intended for use in citations, that should be added to the documentation. --[[User:Jfhutson|JFH]] ([[User talk:Jfhutson|talk]]) 16:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Is this template intended for use in the body of articles? If so, it seems in clear violation of [[WP:ELPOINTS|ELPOINTS]] 2 (for which "exceptions are rare"), and the suppression of the arrow symbol further obscures the fact that external links are being used in-text. If it is only intended for use in citations, that should be added to the documentation. --[[User:Jfhutson|JFH]] ([[User talk:Jfhutson|talk]]) 16:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

== Some fixes ==

* Added <nowiki><includeonly></nowiki> tags for a clean doc page.
* Added class "nourlexpansion", which prevents the biblegateway URL from showing up when printed (ugh!).
* Removed the extraneous semicolons from the URL (mostly harmless but annoying).
* Fixed URL encoding, just in case.

Also note that [[Template:hide in print]] and [[Template:only in print]] are currently [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48052#c3 broken] and likely will not be fixed. However, the brokenness is simply that printing will be the same as on-screen, and the workaround is to add the "plainlinks" and "nourlexpansion" classes, which has been done. If you export to PDF, you just get some extraneous biblegateway URLs in the References section, which is not too bad.

For the [[Template:bibleref2c]] template:

* Removed the false link coloring of the brackets and made the brackets part of the link, as with "real" footnotes.
* Removed unnecessary <nowiki><span></nowiki> wrappers.

--[[User:SlothMcCarty|SlothMcCarty]] ([[User talk:SlothMcCarty|talk]]) 14:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:55, 28 November 2013

Default

Why is the default TNIV? Wouldn't it be better to go to NET Bible or a similar (more impartial) resource? NET bible for example displays a range of translations automatically for any single Bible verse.

See, e.g. John 3:16 on NET bible:

This would be so much better IMHO.

Your thoughts? Mr magnolias (talk) 02:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can reset Bibleref2, Bibleref2c, Bibleref2-nb, Bibleref2c-nb to default to any version at bible.org, but a default version is required. The main advantage to Bibleref2 is that it is quick for an editor to enter a Bible reference with it. An editor can insert a different default on a per-insertion basis. When the user clicks on the verse's hyperlink, it brings the verse up in the default version, but right above it is a menu window to select any of the many versions available, and in other languages.
Bibleref2 is in such wide use that we would not want to make such a major change to it. Thanks for your suggestion.

AFA Prof01 (talk) 04:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am agreed that the TNIV is not useful here. I probably breached some protocol changing this; if so, I apologize. I switched it to the ESV because the TNIV is now-defunct. They're currently cancelling and revising it. The ESV enjoys significantly broader Protestant usage as well. DRJ (talk) 07:25, 28 March 2010 (UTC) 07:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want to show the default version, you're not forced to use it. Change it by adding another parameter to the syntax, separated by this character (|) at the end of the command. Mdoc7 (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use biblegateway's default?

If we omit the &version= parameter, biblegateway.com allow user to set a default bible using cookies. Why not just use that one? -- 59.148.232.130 (talk) 02:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --SlothMcCarty (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this template use <span class="plainlinks">? Isn't that misleading? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The plainlinks class removes the little arrow that would normally accompany an 'external' link. The objective here is to clean up the bibleref2 citations. The blue arrow icons further kluge the edited pages, and there have been quite a few complaints about how using any Bible citation in the text create hard-to-read text blocks. So plainlinks and superscript options were added to help create cleaner appearances. Misleading? I don't see how since the result clearly shows the source to be Biblegateway. Thanks for your concern. ─AFA Prof01 (talk) 16:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So why don't we use <span class="plainlinks"> with IMDb or YouTube links or any of the other links in the Category:External link templates? I checked a couple of other templates in the Category:Bible link templates, and they did not use <span class="plainlinks">; why this one? Surely, the reason for those little arows is to inform the user of the nature of the link. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bibleref2 v. Bibleverse

I'm now a bit confused, when exactly should I use the Bibleverse Template and when the Bibleref2? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bibleverse I feel that since the Bibleverse Template give the all list of the different languages and versions and there every reader can choose and compare, would be for general citations better. Are there any guideline on the use of the two different Template? I noticed a difference: in the Bibleref2 Template if the name of the book is written in the short form, the citation would appear as superscript. I find the option very useful. --Dia^ (talk) 08:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Intended for use in article bodies?

Is this template intended for use in the body of articles? If so, it seems in clear violation of ELPOINTS 2 (for which "exceptions are rare"), and the suppression of the arrow symbol further obscures the fact that external links are being used in-text. If it is only intended for use in citations, that should be added to the documentation. --JFH (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some fixes

  • Added <includeonly> tags for a clean doc page.
  • Added class "nourlexpansion", which prevents the biblegateway URL from showing up when printed (ugh!).
  • Removed the extraneous semicolons from the URL (mostly harmless but annoying).
  • Fixed URL encoding, just in case.

Also note that Template:hide in print and Template:only in print are currently broken and likely will not be fixed. However, the brokenness is simply that printing will be the same as on-screen, and the workaround is to add the "plainlinks" and "nourlexpansion" classes, which has been done. If you export to PDF, you just get some extraneous biblegateway URLs in the References section, which is not too bad.

For the Template:bibleref2c template:

  • Removed the false link coloring of the brackets and made the brackets part of the link, as with "real" footnotes.
  • Removed unnecessary <span> wrappers.

--SlothMcCarty (talk) 14:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]