Template talk:Date table sorting/Archive 2 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Date_table_sorting/Archive_2

This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Date table sorting. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Other date ranges MOS:DOB informs that simple day–day ranges which use an unspaced en dash are perfectly acceptable (sample):

• 5–7 January 1979; January 5–7, 1979; elections were held March 5–8

Help:Sorting#Day and month gives examples of Dts templates working just fine for one day of the month.

However, the ranges (which are recommended by MOS:DOB as perfectly fine), are being rejected by the Dts template en masse. Please fix this if you know how, in order to make the Dts template compatible with our Manual of Style. Thank you. Poeticbent talk 15:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

It says that they are acceptable for use in articles, but DTS isn't capable of using them in sorts. It would make the logic of figuring out the year, month and day for the purposes of generating a sort string much more difficult. Basically what dts does is takes a variety of formats and figure out the year, month and day from them and uses that to build a long invisible number which allows for consistent sorting. So for example, you can have "2002-02-27" and "26 Jun 1988" in the same list and it will make it so that the second will properly sort before the first. Template:Dts/doc shows all the formats that it does handle. The additional logic to properly handle "January 4-5, 1998", "January 4-February 1, 1998", "4-12 January 1998" "4 January - 1 February 1998" (all of which should sort to the same value" and others would be a significant expansion of the code. Given its use in over 20,000 pages, I think it would take a *lot* of testing as well before release.Naraht (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Additionally, the question become whether every other form should be handled by DTS including circa, after and before...Naraht (talk) 19:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know about the the DTS handling capabilities, Naraht. Needless to say, the difficulties which you described above do not change the fact that the DTS template – as it stands – is not compatible with the MOS:DOB policy, and the policy does not even inform about that incompatibility, making people like me wonder whether the fault in formatting was ours alone, and thus only wasting time trying to correct ourselves, before giving up on it. Poeticbent talk 20:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

{{dts}} works with a single date. Why would you expect it to handle a range of dates? If there are several articles that need such a feature it might be reasonable to make a new template for that specific purpose. I like simple names and Template:dts2 might be good. I see that page was deleted per TfD. It would not be straightforward because the examples here are like "January 4–5" but could be much trickier, such as "1 Feb 2011 to 5 March 2015". Johnuniq (talk) 23:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The "code" for dts is at Module:Dts. If anyone has suggestions on upgrading it to handle date ranges, so that it sorts on the first day in the range, I'd love to take a look. It appears that the primary editor (though no edits since 2015) for the template is Mr. Stradivarius, but as I indicated, the testing would be significant.Naraht (talk) 01:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Please start by linking to a couple of articles where this would be useful. Then produce a comprehensive set of examples that should work. Above we see "4–5 Jan" and "January 4–5". Should hyphens instead of en dashes be accepted? What about "to"? What other forms of input should be accepted? There is no need for an elaborate table—just a simple list showing the date range only. Johnuniq (talk) 08:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

If you want an example, the one specific article which prompted me to come here was the Anti-communist_resistance_in_Poland_(1944–1946)#List_of_attacks_on_Communist_prisons,_camps_and_state_security_offices. My intention was to make the sortable-table column about the months of the attacks produce a sensible result: January, February, March ... down to the New Years Eve of the last day of December. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 14:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi all. The traditional way to make this kind of thing work is to use {{dts|1945|11|22|hide=yes}}November 22–23 {{dts|1945|11|22|format=hide}}November 22–23. The template part of that produces the hidden sort code only, which makes it sort correctly, and then the only part you see is the text outside of the template invocation.

While this words, it is a little inelegant. I was thinking that it might be neater to change the module to allow a |display= parameter, so that you could do something like {{dts|1945|11|22|display=November 22–23}} instead. Does that sound like a reasonable suggestion? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 11:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I think that the original discussion got off track with how to interpret complex examples, and I think that simply having it not do so is probably the right answer. I've used the hidden trick myself for including things like Fall and Spring in fraternity founding listings. I support the addition of a display parameter with the idea that whatever is in display is the entire display. (Having said that, I think the example article should be changed so that the year is part of the same column). I think that the hide parameter should be kept, simply because trying to change everything that uses hide to instead use display seems like a monster task even for a bot, but I think that can be kicked down the road slightly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 14:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I definitely support change of the module to allow a |display= parameter. The example of "{{dts|1945|11|22|hide=yes}}November 22–23" looks like someone is just trying too hard to do, what's impossible. The actual year column has nothing to do with it. Please, do it, if you know how. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 15:07, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Oops, I just realised that the current parameter is |format=hide, not |hide=yes. I've fixed my example above. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Poeticbent Since the dates in question for that article range over 1944, 1945 and 1946, once a clear way to change the Month/day column is worked out, I think it does make sense to combine (especially since a sort which simply sorts by year will not be useful), but I'll start that discussion on the article talk page *after* the display parameter is available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 17:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Poeticbent talk 17:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Poeticbent and Naraht: I've added the |display= parameter to the module sandbox. If you want to test it out, you can do so with {{dts/sandbox}}. Let me know if you spot anything strange. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 17:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Please try again. We are almost there. {{dts|1945|05|27|display=May 27–28}} does not stop at the month and just one single day in display, but also, automatically adds the year to it, which looks like this: May 27, 1945 (no range given). Also, could you add |hide=yes as a valid alternative to |format=hide. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 17:35, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Poeticbent: The main template isn't updated yet, just the sandbox, so for now you need to use {{dts/sandbox|1945|05|27|display=May 27–28}}. As for |hide=yes, I'm not so sure - I think it complicates the code for no real benefit. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 22:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: Any chance this template will get updated with the |display= functionality? - Paul^T+/_C 17:20, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Looking at Template:Dts/doc there are tables which all have empty "hidden sort key" columns. So then why is that column there? Is it for addkey or is it for the value of span attribute data-sort-value as seen here: view-source:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:User123o987name/sandbox&oldid=876188630? I think it's for the former, but if it is for the latter then values will be difficult to add considering how convoluted things are. --User123o987name (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Is there an easy way to get output to automatically determined and include the day of the week? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

See {{WEEKDAYNAME}} and {{Weekday}}. {{WEEKDAYNAME|{{Weekday|2001|09|11}}}} → Tuesday. There might be an easier way. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:16, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I should have been more clear. I would like to input 3-16-2019 into a single template to produce Sat., 16 Mar 2019 or the equivalent. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:54, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

There may be a way to decode 3-16-2019 using this template but I hope not because that format is ambiguous (although the values make it obvious in this case that it is month-day-year). Something like 4-1-2019 could be April 1 or 4 January 2019. Using {{extract}} it is possible to decode unambiguous dates:

• {{extract|2019-3-16|show=%a., %-d %b %Y}} → Sat., 16 Mar 2019
• {{extract|Mar 16, 2019|show=%a., %-d %b %Y}} → Sat., 16 Mar 2019

The date codes are documented at Module:Date. Johnuniq (talk) 23:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks and I apologize for still not being clear. If I type 3|16|2019 in any order..... Or if I type those numeric digits with some other dilineation...... is there a single SIMPLE template that will output a date in any format that includes the day of the week?NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:12, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

As well as {{extract}}, you could also try using the #time parser function, although I wouldn't call it simple. Maybe taking a different tack would be best here - where are you thinking of using this date-converting function? If we know a little bit more about what you want to use it for we might be able to give you some better options. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:45, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks to all for help here. Whether it is needed is a matter of ongoing discussion at School strike for climate. My personal opinion remains conflicted.

This paragraph is an offtopic sidebar that I offer just to briefly explain the substance of the dispute, to give context. No need to reply to any of this here, though if you have thoughts to share it would be great to read those in the thread at talk page for the article. The location is School strike for climate. In defining the article scope the lead specifically says the events involve kids skipping school to protest for climate action. The key things is "skipping school". On article talk an IP observed that some of the events may have been held after school hours or on days when school was not in session. So the question is whether such individual events qualify for inclusion in the table. If this tool existed, it could help assess the scope of this dilemma. I could copy paste the entire table to a word processor and reformat the data in the date date column with a search and replace macro then copy back to the article. What we DO with the result is a matter for continued editing/discussion.

Returning now to topical question about the tools, in order to be really useful it would have to be super simple for a wide range of international nonNative English speakers to use. Thanks to all for your help. Again, if you have comments on the substance of the dilemma please add them at article talk. And thanks!

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:07, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

It appears that most or all of the subpages of this template are no longer used, now that it has been converted to a module. Here's a list of the subpages:

Can we nominate these subpages for deletion? Is there any reason to preserve them for historical reference? I'll check each one for incoming links and transclusions before nominating, unless someone here wants to take on the TFD work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

The more urgent problem is that this template is being used in many places where it isn't necessary. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:22, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

• Are {{Dts/out}}, {{Dts/out/sandbox}}, {{Dts/sandbox/doc}} and {{Dts/sandbox/examples}} still needed? --Gonnym (talk) 07:43, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

  No, they are no longer used, and can be safely deleted. There's one page, User:Salton Finneger/sandbox, using Template:Dts/out, but I am guessing that User:Salton Finneger probably won't mind if it breaks. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

  @RHaworth: You asked here to let you know if any of the ones left should be also deleted - these 4 can be deleted as well. --Gonnym (talk) 11:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

  No objections whatsoever from me. I'll go ahead and blank the sandbox page—I've long since forgotten about whatever I was trying to do there. —Salton Finneger (talk) 16:40, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Has this template rejected attempts to use the MM/DD/YYYY format?, It outputs a format like that in DD/MM/YYYY.

{{dts|08/04/2006}} should be displayed as 4 August 2006, instead it will output 8 April 2006.--98.31.29.4 (talk) 17:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

{{#time: m/d/Y|{{dts|2006-08-26|format=dmy}}}} should output 08/26/2006 but instead it outputs as Error: Invalid time.

{{date|{{dts|26/08/2006|format=dmy}}|ISO}} should output 2006-08-26 but instead it outputs as 26 August 2006 (not converted to ISO).

Why is this template an invalid input?

The #time parser function and the {{date}} template have valid inputs, if the format input is valid then it should work, but why not this one? --2605:A000:1103:76B:C962:C32:B19B:FE71 (talk) 01:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

{{dts}} is for sortable dates in a table. It outputs a hidden sort key which you can see at Special:ExpandTemplates. The sort key means it is cannot be parsed as a date. Johnuniq (talk) 03:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Could the template be coded to add support for the word "present" so that it will treat it as the current date when sorting and will also display that text? To give it context: a table for television programs that have a column for when it debuted and when it ended. For programs that are still running, instead of leaving the column empty, I'd like to be able to write "present". This is similar to how the documentation at {{Infobox television season}} says to use dates with {{End date}} (though I don't see where exactly that template supports that). --Gonnym (talk) 14:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Can we get an option for format=ymd? In timeline tables, it's the year that's the most important, plus it's ISO, so it would be nice to have it as an option. — kwami (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved. See general agreement below (perhaps a bit rough) to expand the template and module names. Please be patient as I will run some tests before I move the module page. If those tests run smoothly, then help from an admin will be needed to move the fully-protected template page. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there  13:36, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

---

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved. The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment. Links: current log • target log

• Template:Dts → Template:Date table sorting
• Module:Dts → Module:Date table sorting

– Expand overabbreviated template name. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 04:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

• Split from Template talk:Number table sorting#Requested move 31 May 2019. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
• Support - having clear names makes both understanding what the template is, and finding such templates easier for editors unfamiliar with said templates. Also WP:TPN. --Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
• Support - the full name should be the default name.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 03:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
• Support Ythlev (talk) 16:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

  The move caused huge-ish disruption, messing up all or nearly all of the 3,270 list-articles in the system covering places listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, e.g. National Register of Historic Places listings in San Miguel County, New Mexico for just one example. I have asked User:BD2412 at their Talk page to reverse the move ASAP, then to sort out how the move can be accomplished without damage, later. --Doncram (talk) 03:56, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  Strictly speaking, it is the module, not the template, that is the problem. I was not aware that modules could not be redirected. I have moved it back for now, and created a duplicate at the original move target until all the links can be changed over. bd2412 T 03:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  (ec) I don't know about modules vs. whatever else (i have created/modified templates but I don't even know what a module is) so take this comment as not fully informed. But there may be widespread other problems caused by the move. Actually, since the DTS template is transcluded so widely, I don't think the above discussion was adequate, so could the move discussion close be cancelled and the discussion reopened? With notice given to Village Pump and WikiProject NRHP and perhaps numerous other forums. One issue that usually/often doesn't matter is that one name uses less keystrokes than another, but here to expand to a longer name causes a significant increase in data storage/usage and perhaps reading times. Also implementation details were not adequately considered, apparently. This is too big of a change I think to be decided by just a few. --Doncram (talk) 04:03, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) Implementation details were not adequately considered. No, I was fully aware of the fact that it is not possible to leave a redirect behind when moving a module when I filed this requested move. Contrary to what you said, it is not somehow necessary to advertise every single requested move of a highly-used template to VPT, NRHP has nothing to do with this template's purpose and naming, meaning notifying it would be inappropriate. As users of Wikipedia, we do not need to worry about things like a significant increase in data storage/usage and perhaps reading times. There is no grounds for a reopening here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  Maybe it does not cause a performance issue for the servers, but I think it does cause a performance issue for the editors writing out tables, who have to contend with longer rows, sections, pages, harder to edit, not intuitive, when a short code is what they want for the purpose.

  I do agree it would be unfortunate to have to involve in the many NRHP wikiproject editors who certainly don't want to be bothered. But if implementation requires widespread changes by bot or otherwise, they and other wikiprojects who use tables probably do need to be given notice. By giving notice to the village pump, i meant to the Village pump technical section where persons who might better know about likely impacts could be recruited to help implement something here, if it were important to implement something here (which it is not... I don't see why this is being discussed at all... i see no benefit to the project of imposing a change here, and there is cost already, i.e. the cost of the attention required by this discussion already). --Doncram (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  There was only massive cost because the original requested move was implemented in a technically inept way that broke the template. It may be that you see no benefit from templates not having needlessly abbreviated names, but the fact that this requested move had three other users support it clearly indicates that many Wikipedians have the opposite opinion and do see a benefit to templates having non-abbreviated names. I had no reason to suspect that any of this breakage would happen when I started a requested move a few weeks ago, and thus no reason to post to VPT (although nothing is stopping you or anyone else from doing so). Furthermore, there will be no bots that go through all transclusions and change "Dts" to "Date table sorting"-- that task would be in violation of WP:COSMETICBOT. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:53, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  I have to disagree. It turns out that implementing this move would require the editing of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of articles. Therefore, it should not be implemented until there is a clear consensus for such a change, and a strategy in place to implement this both technically and in terms of workflow. This can probably be done by a bot, but it does invoke larger interests. bd2412 T 04:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  No, implementing this requested move would not require editing thousands of articles, it would only require editing three pages, as, although the module can't redirect, the template can, and all of the thousands of transclusions of the module go through the template. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  When I moved the template, that did leave redirects behind, but it did not prevent the widespread template breakage. Do you mean that the fixes can be implemented without needing to edit anything other than those three pages? bd2412 T 04:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) @BD2412: It did not prevent widespread template breakage because you failed to update the template to call the module by its new name. No widespread breakage would have occurred if you had changed the template to say {{#invoke:Date table sorting|main}} instead of {{#invoke:Dts|main}} after you moved the module. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:25, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  Yes, I am aware of that. Now that we have had this discussion it will be easier for a closing admin to implement once the relisting period has elapsed. bd2412 T 04:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose - contrary to what is claimed above, renaming the template and module and then changing the text to point to the updated module name did still result in broken links. I have no idea for what reason, but when I went to 27 Club I found a whole table full of ugly red errors messages instead of dates. This is turning into a massive drain on editor time, and is pointless tinkering, so I am opposing it. But if an admin does close as moved, please at least make sure nothing is broken when you've done so. As BD2412 says, this will probably require setting up a bot to manually change all the links to the template across the wiki. THanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:23, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Seems a bit out of place to revert the consensus attained move and re-open a closed RM. If you saw an error, you should report it so it can be investigated. --Gonnym (talk) 15:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

    Well since the move had broken thousands of pages, I think it was quite justified myself. Try to consider the readers next time, Gonnym, instead of launching attacks on me. If someone wants to close this they can, but it needs much more consideration than has been shown so far. For now it is relisted, as was done by BD2412 this morning.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  I'm seriously baffled. This is far from my first requested move of a module, and all of the other ones I've done have gone smoothly. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  @JJMC89:. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:50, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  @Pppery: yep, as I said above I have no idea what is wrong with it. Just that whatever was attempted was not done correctly! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  Not sure how my comment can be considered "launching [of] attacks on [you]", but I still stand by them. If you'd have reported the issues, someone (me included) could have looked at the issue and see what the issue is. As it stands I have no idea what red errors you saw, as when I try that page with the /sandbox version I don't get those red errors. From a very basic look and without any error to work on, it would seem that the issue might be related to the fact that the module has a specific template set up as the wrapper. --Gonnym (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  Consensus does not become invalid because implementing it is difficult: some templates have sat at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell for more than a year. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:56, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. DTS is quite clear: it is a quick device to make a date sortable and is good as an acronym or code that is not meant to be spoken out literally. The term "date table sorting" is descriptive of the overall issue; one could create a Wikipedia article date table sorting on the general topic, as applies in Wikimedia and in Excel / Lotus 1-2-3, other table systems current and historical. The term "date table sorting" does not naturally apply to the formatting of a given datum. What is needed is a code.

The requested move seems like "needless tinkering" as someone suggested above. It would be like trying to force the world to change from Qwertyuiop keyboards to something more "sensible", which would cause needless disruption. Everyone who uses the template knows what it is; the quest to change it (in order to make it more understandable/clear?) only imposes needless burden on everyone. Or maybe this would be like a quest to replace use of the code "." by the word "period" to make it more understandable? Bad idea period. We all know what the code is, and a code is what is needed, and the expanded term is not even descriptive to the individual usages.

Anyhow I have used template:DTS in the past and was happy enough with it. When editing a page, I would NOT want to write out "date table sorting" a zillion times or to have it written out longer automatically; it literally makes it more difficult to see all of then-longer longer row or section or page. --Doncram (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Nothing is preventing you from calling the template by its redirect if you feel that the shorter name is better (note that, by my count ~5000 articles call Template:Number table sorting through its redirect Template:Nts and zero articles use the full template name directly despite the template having had the longer name since 2010. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:53, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

• Comment The documentation at Template:Dts/doc and perhaps elsewhere linked to there is now screwed up too, showing mixed usage of "dts" and "date table sorting". Some others have tried, and I have tried, to restore previous documentation appearance, but maybe there is more linked templates inside templates that need to be fixed to get it right again. --Doncram (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - DTBSRT or DTbSrt - No one suggested either of these. For those who think that all TLAs (3LtrAcronyms) *must* be limited to three letters, DTS wins. For those who accepted 4 letters TLAs at some point, then graduates of SIXbit (ancient pre-EBCDIC/8-bit ASCII) would find DTBSRT (pre-UpLo) or DTbSrt reasonable, especially since the 2nd T-byte represents both daTe and Tbl/Table. 'Nuff said. Pi314m (talk) 04:15, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I'm not an admin, don't know if my vote counts, but: Clear and to the point: This is not COBOL; I'd suggest MOVE CORRESPONDING-ly. (i.e. recommendation = "Don't") Pi314m (talk) 04:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I echo Gonnym. @Amakuru: What exactly did the error on 27 Club say? And are you sure it was the kind of error that simply a purge wouldn't have eliminated? And even if so, reverting the moves per se may have been justified but it doesn't strike me as a reason to go so far as to reopen the RM—you could have simply reported it so others could identify the problem and carry on with the renaming—this is borderline wheel-warring.​​ Nardog (talk) 18:09, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

• Support. Excessive abbreviation. Jargon. It is a barrier for newcomers. https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/DTS There is no technical advantage to superchort template names, fix it, fix the post-move issues, and active discourage ambiguous names. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I've submitted a request for closure at WP:RFCL § Template talk:Dts#Requested move 1 June 2019. — Newslinger talk 01:02, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

To editor Amakuru: this is a technical request to rename {{Dts}} to {{Date table sorting}}. The module has been renamed and the template now calls the module with the expanded name. As seen at 27 Club#Identified members, there are no error codes tripped. As long as the Dts redirect is left behind, there should be no further problems. Thanks in advance for confirming and for renaming the template! Paine Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there  14:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: @Pppery: OK, I've made the move, but 27 Club is now showing no dates at all in the birth/death columns. I purged its cache too. Have I done something wrong? I won't revert, so we can figure out what's going on, but we need someone who understands these things to sort it out  — Amakuru (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

 Works for me. Perhaps a problem on your end? Nardog (talk) 15:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah It's working now. Must have just taken a while for something on the back end to catch up. All looks good then. Thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

{{date table sorting|2018/02/29|format=dmy|abbr=off}} should output 1 March 2018 instead it outputs as 29 February 2018, is there anyway to correct February 29th as March 1st when the year is not a leap year?

Same goes with {{date table sorting|June 31, 1995}} should output July 1, 1995 instead it outputs as June 31, 1995, is there anyway to correct June 31st as July 1st? --98.31.29.4 (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Please do not attempt to "autocorrect" invalid dates! The templates based on Module:Age (not this template) only accept dates in an unambiguous format, and always display an error with a tracking category when a date is invalid. That catches a surprisingly large amount of mucking around with dates which need to be reverted, not autocorrected to invalid data. This template handles fantastically large dates for use in astronomical tables and similar, whereas the Module:Age templates only handle from 9999 BCE to 9999 CE. Johnuniq (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

This edit request to Template:Date table sorting has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please consider adding a text alignment option |align=, defaulted to the right (e.g.:align={{{align|right}}}). Guarapiranga (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

• I oppose this. What does alignment have to do with sorting? --Gonnym (talk) 19:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. Cabayi (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

The explanation for the wrapping parameter is unclear. Does this template output non-breaking spaces by default, and this parameter change to normal spaces, or is it about allowing the name of a month to break across two lines? Presumably it’s default isn’t “off” as stated.
Jim Craigie (talk) 04:23, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Since this template is intended for use in making table columns sortable, it would be nice if it were possible to set a parameter at the level of the whole table so that options such as |format=dmy, which is required to avoid US-centric dates, do not have to be repeated for each individual date entry? I have no idea if this sort of scope would work in this html/mediawiki mix. Boud (talk) 23:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I support being able to set parameters |format, |abbr, and |nowrap at the table level. In addition the default format should be set by {{use dmy dates}} if present.
Jim Craigie (talk) 04:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Sbd. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 11#Template:Sbd until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:06, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Dates such as 3Q 1984, Spring 2000 or Second Half of 2012 sometimes pop up. In CS1 templates I can specify, e.g., |date=Third Quarter 1984, but {{date table sorting}} doesn't document an equivalent. What is the proper way to handle them? --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

In the preview of an edit I see Vorlage:Date table sorting instead of the date. the date is formatted as | 5,91<ref name="HVZ-BW" /> || {{Date table sorting|1823|08}}. Is something additionally needed? Theking2 (talk) 20:14, 28 July 2022 (UTC) Theking2 (talk) 20:14, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Theking2, that looks like an invalid date. If you fix the date, does the template work? – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

That's at dewiki and de:Vorlage:Date table sorting is a red link there, meaning that the template does not exist. The template works with the date as entered, but not at dewiki. Johnuniq (talk) 00:02, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Since the standard linking and the optional link=off have been removed, couldn't we at least add an optional link=on for special cases? Thanks. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 02:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

After reading WP:DATELINK, please give an example where link=on could be useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)