Template talk:WikiProject banner shell

src: pbs.twimg.com

Bug di WikiProjectBannerShell: tidak lulus = untuk ProyekWiki Biografi template yang hidup ketika diberi blp = yes

This edit deletes pages from Category: Biographic articles with no live parameters. WikiProjectBannerShell has already been given | blp = yes , but does not forward the | parameter living = yes to WikiProject Biography.

I do not know if this can be fixed in the template or if some bots need to update the talk page using this template. I suspect that many entries in the category backlog can be easily deleted. 70.133.144.10 (talk) 06:09, December 15, 2014 (UTC)

There is no technical way (as far as I know) for WPBS templates to forward the parameters to another template, so yes, need to use | blp = yes and | living = yes --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 10:27, December 15, 2014 (UTC)

Video Template talk:WikiProject banner shell

Collapse

Why is this framework no longer crumbling? DrKiernan (talk) 17:32, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

@DrKiernan: View Wikipedia: Pump village (technical)/Archive 137 # Collapsed does not work. - Red rose64 (talk) 23:04, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Maps Template talk:WikiProject banner shell

banner collapsed = no

I am wondering if there is a need for this option. Using it without the option collaped = yes (which I just found on the talk page) actually makes the banner longer because nothing crashes. How much is used? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 11:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

I have tweaked/sandbox to remove this option. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 14:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

And deleted from the template directly. I have updated the documentation. - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 13:22, January 7, 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Template: WikiProjectBanners

For years, Template: WikiProjectBanners has called this template but failed on | collapsed = yes . This is somewhat intuitive because otherwise the two templates are identical. I was wondering if it would be easier to redirect that template to this one, or maybe we should add | collapsed = yes on the usage first? --Ã, Martin (MSGJ Ã, Â · talk) 20:35, January 5, 2016 (UTC)

I have nominated the Template: WikiProjectBanners for removal/merging with this template. Please see Wikipedia: Template for discussion/Log/2016 January 7 - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 13:32, January 7, 2016 (UTC)

Primefac has now closed TfD and redirected Template: WikiProjectBanners to this template. This is not what I have in mind, because we now have a talk page with a large number of banners that do not collapse. See Talk: Barack Obama for example: the banner shell takes up a lot of space. I think we need bots to spin and replace {{WikiProjectBanners}} with {{wikiProject banner shell | collapsed = yes}} before we can do this... --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 11:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Also ping Izno and PC-XT commenting on TfD - Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â, talk) 15:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I know there will be some outliers, but according to Izno's comment about TFD, I think people can add the collapsed option. This is certainly better than having to remove all the extra garbage from the code that was replaced. For now, I have canceled the creation of a redirect, but a certain consensus (at some point) to have WPB to be redirected. Primefac (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I have no substantive opinion besides that final state should be a diversion. --Izno (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

4700 transclusions... Bots can replace it, or people can add collapsed options at will. I also do not mind. - PC-XT 22:03, February 11, 2016 (UTC)

I just posted a request on Wikipedia: Request bot # WikiProjectBanners for bots to do this. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 13:59, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to JJMC89 for taking this. BRFA has now been opened. - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 23:03, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

Bot has now finished the job and Template: WikiProjectBanners has been redirected to this template. Thank you to all of you. It's now clearer and easier to use. - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 20:40, March 19, 2016 (UTC)

src: static.giantbomb.com

Template name

Would anyone mind if we move this template to Template: WikiProject banner shell? Separating words and avoiding CamelCase? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 20:38, January 5, 2016 (UTC)

Are not there any number of scripts and bots expecting names now? - Red rose64 (talk) 20:58, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe - do you know which one? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 13:13, January 6, 2016 (UTC)

For the record, there are 17 redirects to this template, and they seem to cover almost any base. Primefac (talk) 04:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm also sure that keeping the redirects will be enough to make the bot work. Is there any contradiction to this renaming proposal? Should I start RM or just move it? - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 11:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

The strange capitalization for this template always gets me (from the days when we camcorded our template, no doubt, rather than providing for readability). I will support that step. I also support {{shell WikiProject}}. --Izno (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I think {{WikiProject banner shell}} will be the right move target, and {{shell WikiProject}} seems like a good name for redirects. - PC-XT 21:51, February 11, 2016 (UTC)

I have moved. Please no more redirects! We already have 16. I plan to nominate some rarely used redirects for removal. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 13:21, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

So based on the exact will of three editors, all the million plus uses of this template, which was under the original name since it was made nine years ago, is now Wikipedia: Redirects. - DanielPenfield (talk) 07:02, February 17, 2016 (UTC)

The point is yes, that's right;) Is there a problem with that? If so, I suggest we open WP: RM discussion. - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 08:34, February 17, 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Redirects

The following template redirects to this template. I wonder if they are all needed? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 23:06, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

Update:

I've added some proposals to the table above, basically to remove a redirect with less than 100 transclusions. Not sure about some of them. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 23:22, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

• I support deleting {{shell}} and {{WBPS}}, and others with fewer than 25 transclusions, as suggested. I'm thinking of keeping {{WP Banner Shell}} and maybe {{WPBannerShell}} for now, but I do not really care. - PC-XT 23:51, February 12, 2016 (UTC)
• I have nominated 8 of them (with & lt; 25 transclusions) for deletion. Please see Wikipedia: Redirection for discussion/Log/2016 February 13 # Various diversion Templates: WikiProject banner shell - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 18:22, February 13, 2016 (UTC)

Shell, WBPS, and Wikiproject Shell Banner are deleted. After deletion, I moved all transclusion to the WikiProject banner shell. - JJMC89 (T Ã, Â · C) 01:55, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Update

All the best: Rich Farmbrough , 20:48, August 10, 2016 (UTC).

Update 19 April 2017

Interestingly we see almost all usage growing except for small ones. All the best: RichÃ, Farmbrough , 19:54, April 19, 2017 (UTC).

src: pbs.twimg.com

Custom text

The text parameter is available to define custom text instead of the default "This template is interesting for the following WikiProjects". I do not know if this is used anywhere, or maybe this function can only be removed from the template. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 21:21, March 24, 2016 (UTC)

Deleted. If this is actually used anywhere, please go back - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 23:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Most of the usage parameters in the WPBS example misuse WPBS to hide things that are not WikiProjects, or in one case, to create two groups of WikiProjects arbitrarily. --Izno (talk) 12:18, March 30, 2016 (UTC)

That's it. Can you give me an example or two? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 18:38, March 30, 2016 (UTC)

You may be able to work through my recent speech change from today - "wpbs misuse". There are also some cases where attributes or templates are empty, and some others where it is used correctly but basically say the same thing with the current template. --Izno (talk) 18:55, March 30, 2016 (UTC)

So this is widely used. Should I revert my change, or are you happy to continue the cleanup operation? How do you find this usage? Will the tracking category help? --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 08:35, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

For 50 deletions of ~ 1 million instances in Talk space, you probably will not revert your changes. I'm doing a search like that: -intitle: "/archive" hastemplate: "WikiProject banner shell" insource:/\ | \ s * text/"in Talk: namespace Only ~ 900 occurrences of this pattern in the namespace, most of which are false positives with eg {{tmbox}}. I get everything I noticed from the stack A tracking category might will find the rest of them in the Talk namespace plus other examples out there, as I'm sure I miss one or two people given the large number of false positives.-Izno (talk) 11:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

The same pattern in all speech spaces of Wikipedia [1] generates about 980 results. The search all gave the same result. --Izno (talk) 11:37, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

Cat tracking: Category: WPBS using custom text - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â, talk) 11:49, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

Will the capture catch the called but empty | text = and | text = somevalue being called and not empty ? --Izno (talk) 11:58, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

No, it will not detect empty parameters, but so does the previous template, so I do not think you need to worry about that - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 12: 03, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

* shrugs *. I just do not want someone copying such inappropriate use and expect it to work. I will leave the category to be filled for the next week or two - most of the talk page does not get too much traffic so all the changes will be in the job queue. --Izno (talk) 12:07, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

------------------------------------ - ------------------------------------------------- - ------------- Code is in/sandbox if you really think it's worth - Martin (MSGJ Ã, Â · Talk) 12:15, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Error expression in Talk: Kosovo

Can someone investigate why there are errors Bad expression: Unexpected & gt; operator in Talk: Kosovo? It appears to be derived from this template (because it only appears when included with whatever is embedded in it), but I can not determine the cause or do it. No such user (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Checking out... --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I think it's a PAGESIZE parser function in the Template: Ifexist does not redirect. It appears to have changed its behavior if the target is empty. Will continue to investigate. - Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · speech) 11:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Fix it . The latest revision in Talk history: Kosovo/Comment is a step and seems to lose page size for some reason. I made a mock copy and then returned it. Everything looks fine now. --Ã, Martin (MSGJÃ, Ã, Â · talk) 11:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. No such user (talk) 11:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

src: bunniefoo.com

Templates are empty - no banners are attached

I just created this fix . I think we may need a tracking category for cases where | 1 = missing or empty. - Red rose64 (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

That's a good idea. Primefac (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Class once

Is not there going to be a way to organize classes just once? Rather ridiculous how a shell with three or ten banners can not inherit a class rating from a parent template (and thus three/ten places need to be changed instead of one). All the individual banners actually doing that are giving a relatively important appraisal. czar 21:05, September 10, 2016 (UTC)

@Czar: You should review and may comment on WT: COUNCIL # Thorough review of article ratings. --Izno (talk) 21:21, September 10, 2016 (UTC)

I want to see if this is even feasible from the technical end. If it is easy to implement, it is something that WikiProjects can choose to follow or exit without much fuss. (The proposal seems more serious.) tsar 23:17, September 10, 2016 (UTC)

The problem is the child banner can not know the class if it's set in the shell, or on another child's banner. As I commented on in other discussions, that means WikiProject needs to be comfortable with the intersection of categories to understand the quality of articles in their domain, rather than the actual category. It may adversely affect the template summary of the number of articles with quality levels crossed by interests; I think the bot can be programmed to handle the case, but now it's a trivial call {{PAGESINCATEGORY}}, I think. --Izno (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

See also Template talk: WPBannerMeta # Added the PageAssessment parser function. - Red rose64 (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Include protection templates that are automatically displayed for protected files?

Templates: Documentation and Templates: This is a redirect including some code that causes them to display template protection whenever they are posted on a protected page. I am wondering if it makes sense to include such functionality in this template and also posted on many talk pages - or is there a better place? I believe under the Wikipedia provisions: Editor templates this idea should be offered for possible first clash. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contribution) 09:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus, I'm not exactly sure what you're asking for. Just like that, I see two possibilities that you can say:

• The template you mentioned transclude things like {{pp-move}} to the page if the page is protected. I'm not sure how well such notifications will work on the talk page of the article in question. Often the talk page is not protected, so it can be confusing.
• Automatically transclude {{permanently protected}} or {{temporarily protected}} to the talk page depending on which article it is protected. However, on a page that already has the template, it will be redundant.

I may have misunderstood your original question, so if I go, I welcome your correction. Primefac (talk) 14:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

The first, which is something the Documentation and Redirection templates do to automatically design and transfer templates and redirects (respectively). The protection icon is not displayed on an unprotected page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contribution) 14:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I think that's where you lost me. Doc/Redir Templates are used in the article itself, while WPBS is used on the talk page. There is no way to influence what appears on the article by placing something in Talk. You can influence what appears on the Talk page based on what's in the article, though... but again, it will return to my second bullet of duplication potential. Primefac (talk) 15:48, October 8, 2016 (UTC)

Ah, here I see the problem. The idea is to display a protection icon on the talk page when the talk page is protected, has nothing to do with the related article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contribution) 15:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

In this case, adding a topic is really just a matter of taste. Will small keys stop anyone when "this page is protected" big notifications are on the page, or when they go to edit it say they can not? This is a hypothetical question, and frankly I have no opinion on the matter. I agree that some form of consensus should be made before making changes, and I will cross-post to WP: WPT to help with that. Primefac (talk) 16:29, October 8, 2016 (UTC)

This is an automation issue. If the state stands up, if the prot level of the talk page increases or decreases (it may become unprotected), you need to make separate edits to add, modify or delete protection templates - whether the template displays large banners or padlocks. The suggestion is to remove the manual editing, by making {{shell WikiProject}} detect the prot level automatically, and display the padlock if appropriate. - Red rose64 (talk) 19:21, October 8, 2016 (UTC)

Fair point, I do not think about the automation side of things. I'll wait a day or two to see if there's any conflict (though I see no reason why not) and I'll throw in the relevant code. Primefac (talk) 19:29, October 8, 2016 (UTC)

I do not see this change as desirable, because it is not in the purpose of this template to handle such things, and it creates a special case that pages with banner shell and without shell banners can be treated differently by the protective editor - something which the editor would not possibly realize/intuitively for that editor. --Izno (talk) 12:59, October 10, 2016 (UTC)

src: pbs.twimg.com

Is this template added to the article automatically?

If I remember correctly, there used to be a Wikipedia bot that automatically adds this template to articles that are within the scope of some WikiProjects, like this one. Does Wikipedia have tools that can automate template transclusions? Jarble (talk) 00:11, November 21, 2016 (UTC)

This is now included in the list of tasks performed by Users: BattyBot. Jarble (talk) 22:27, May 26, 2017 (UTC)

src: pbs.twimg.com

Delete or replace the WikiProject Council icon

The WikiProject Council.svg decorative icon has been added to this template in 2013 (diff) at the request of Rezonansowy (talk archive). Two problems with this. First, the image is GFDL/CC-BY-SA, so it should be linked to attribution, with an alternative text for accessibility. Second, the visual detail and become blurred at the height of one line. I left it there in my latest edits, but I do not think it adds anything other than visual and sound chaos. Is there a simpler visual alternative and PD/CC0, which is more suitable for the use of small decorative icons? Or better delete it? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 13:39, January 15, 2017 (UTC)

I do not see any special need to have an image there, so if a matching substitute can not be found then removal may be the best option. Primefac (talk) 15:05, January 15, 2017 (UTC)

No problem! Problem solved with recent editing by User: CFCF. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 05:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Request Changes to Wiki Syntax

I am requesting that the template code be completely replaced by the wiki syntax version in Template: WikiProject banner/shell banner on this edit. (Full disclosure: edits made by me I have not used that account for years, and I did not realize I was signed in).-- 216.12.10.118 (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please make a consensus for this change before using template {{edit template-protected}} . Your change is not a clear improvement in any sense. Wiki syntax is categorically lower for a widely used template like this one. Izno (talk) 23:15, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

@Izno: , so wiki syntax is certainly more difficult in templates requiring parser functions where tables must be embedded in a function (so how do we get things like {{!}}, but this template does not fit that description There is no reason why HTML markup will be used here, you may assume that something is infringing and I am confident about it (and if that's what you think, I understand - the IP is weird.) If you want to tell me that assumption, I'll invite/encourage you to try - that's a test page for But I'll be happy to wait to see if there who objected to the change.-- 216.12.10.118 (talk) 23:43, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

I do not need to be invited to a test page - as someone with template editor permissions, I'm expected to use it where I'm not sure how a request works. I'm just sure that your changes are a) unnecessary and b) actually have some negative effects because of the need for some extra processing of the wiki text compared to the direct HTML. --Izno (talk) 23:52, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

@Izno: You say you know what you're doing, but frankly your editing is in Template: The old movement suggests that this is a knee jerk. (For example, you do not seem to notice that the template on the talk page, used to illustrate the issue, is completely bankrupt before you revert the changes by saying "not an improvement"... then you leave the template with a non-existent alignment problem.) If you believe that the processing argument is valid, then I will leave you for it. Although I am wondering if you can edit all Wikipedia Templates to remove the wiki syntax, or if you just arbitrarily invoke arguments now. I hope to find out! - 216.12.10.118 (talk) 23:56, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

Third Opinion

Hello: So the dispute here is whether the wiki syntax will be better than the HTML code in this template. I admit that templates embedded in the parser function make some lines of code confusing to someone who is not very familiar with coding templates, but this template does not match that description. Code in Template: WikiProject banner/sandbox (which does not use work like {{!}}) Produce the exact same output as the current code. Izno said that the use adds additional processing burden, and it becomes clear: he is right. But this load (which is basically nominal) has not caused the template editor to rush the template space instead of wiki-syntax-bolding ('' ') with HTML-syntax-bolding (& lt; b & gt; & lt;/b & gt ;).-- 216.12.10.118 (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Um... should not be brash, but how can you have a third opinion of the same IP that wrote the original request? Primefac (talk) 15:30, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

This one: the request starts with an unqualified request to replace the live template with one sandbox. No reason or explanation. The proposer should explain the problem with this template, and explain how the change will solve the problem; or if there is no problem, they should show how the proposed changes will be useful. - Red rose64? (talk) 21:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: I do not pretend! Sorry if you got that impression. @Redrose64: Fair enough! Just to be clear though: the reason is "wiki syntax version" (generally wiki syntax is preferred for HTML).-- 216.12.10.118 (talk) 02:26, ​​â € <â € <9 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, so there is no problem with such a template - or if it exists, you do not say what it is. So maybe you feel that your proposal is a profitable change. You want us to switch to "wiki syntax version", claiming "generally wiki syntax is preferred over HTML" - where is this declared in policy or guide? - Red rose64? (talk) 08:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

src: www.nausicaa.net

1 =

I "1 =" still needed at the end of the first line? If so, why? It seems to have no functionality and templates seem to work fine without it. Thank you, Jweiss11 (talk) 14:20, May 2, 2017 (UTC)

It was never technically required. However, passing an anonymous parameter with multiple sub-arguments will work best when you explicitly name the parameters. So {{foo | bar}} and {{foo | 1 = bar}} is functionally identical, but if & lt; bar & gt; value contains the template code that can exit the first parameter earlier. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

What does Primefac say? This avoids any potential chaos because of this template to attach other templates. Ã, Â · Ã, Â · ??? Ã, Â · ?? Ã, Â · Talk to Nihonjoe Ã, Â · Join WP Japan ! 15:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Request about [show] and [Expand ]

I have noticed that when you set this to collapse, the text that displays says "Click [show]" even though the actual button is called "[Expand]". See Talk: Tank Man for this example. I would rather if this can be fixed by changing "[Expand]" and "[Collapse]" to "[Show]" and "[Hide]", though I'm not sure if it can be done? but I will accept the change

 | multiple [[Wikipedia: WikiProject | WikiProjects]]. Click [show] for more details.  

for

 | multiple [[Wikipedia: WikiProject | WikiProjects]]. Click [expand] for more details.  

too. - A L T E R C A R I ? 12:29, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

Not done: I'm not quite sure what you're seeing. Well in Talk: Tank Man and a half dozen other pages I checked, I saw:

This article is interesting for some WikiProjects. Click [show] for more details

immediately followed by the [show] link. Primefac (talk) 12:32, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

Really weird. I went back to Tank Man to see if I was going crazy, but the right button did not say [Expand], and when clicked changed to [Collapse]. This is weird because all WikiProject templates contain show [show] and [hide]. How could this happen?

- A L T E R C A R I ? 12:40, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

Do not know. Maybe it's a CSS thing, maybe a browser thing. Additionally, there is no real way to change the show/hide link itself, because it's displayed because of this line of code:

& lt; table role = "presentation" class = "tmbox tmbox-notice wpbs mbox-inside mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style = "border-collapse: separate;" cellspacing = "4" & gt;

So I think that's the user side rather than server side stuff. Primefac (talk) 13:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for checking it out. Users side like my Wiki account? Or my computer settings? Could it be because I set my Wikipedia to en-gb? I am not so tense that I do not often mess up the settings... I would be surprised if this irregularity is just me.

- A L T E R C A R I ? 13:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

That's true. I never changed it to en-gb because seeing "en-English" in the language preference made me think there's only a one setting. Primefac (talk) 14:07, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

Rejected by American English, One True English?

- A L T E R C A R I ? 14:19, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

@Altercari: That preference is one of the most misunderstood we have. "en-English" is not American English - this is a generic, international form. The fact that two others (en-gb and en-ca) also exist only adds to the confusion, especially since the system messages are usually updated for the en form, but not for the other two. Few people will have difficulty if they switch from en-gb or en-ca to plain en. - Red rose64? (talk) 14:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

src: jazz.net

Add a | listas = parameter

Proposal: add a

 | listas = 

The documentation for this template says do not add Do not add blp = no or living = no for dead people. Is that true? And also WP: BLP mapp is valid for a certain period of time after death so an article about a newly deceased person may have to be blp = yes for a few months.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Adding | blp = no or anything other than | blp = yes does nothing for the template, so saying "do not add" is more of an unnecessary instruction than anything else. Primefac (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia