Template talk:Infobox software

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox software template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: 3 months

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
	This template is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This template is supported by Free and open-source software.

Template:Infobox software is permanently protected from editing as it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

Bug in template?

Article fdupes shows this in the References section:

 {{cite web}}: Empty citation (help): Missing or empty |title= (help)

The reference is to the line "Stable release" in the "Infobox software" which probably is filled in using Wikidata. I am pretty sure this is not intended behavior, but I cannot figure what goes wrong. Ideas anybody? Wammes Waggel (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue is not here but at {{Wikidata}} and Module:wd, which is used as the field value. The module fails to obtain the citation title from Wikidata and generates the template without it. It appears the relevant code was removed in this edit last month. Perhaps @Janhrach has more insights? IceWelder [✉] 16:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That infobox (and all other infoboxes) needs to use Module:WikidataIB, not {{Wikidata}}, per the instructions at the top of {{Wikidata}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The template is used directly in the article, not by this infobox. IceWelder [✉] 17:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed caused by {{Wikidata}}. Titles are required in Wikdata references, have been required for over a year. Janhrach (talk) 14:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was confused because it looked like the module failed to parse the title, when in actuality I read the table in reverse! @Wammes Waggel: I added the title to the Wikidata ref and it seems to work now. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 17:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Wammes Waggel (talk) 18:47, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delay in Reflecting Wikidata Updates on Wikipedia

Any changes or updates to a Wikidata item should be reflected in the corresponding Wikipedia article without delay. However, it appears that there is a delay—possibly several hours—which is unacceptable. I am unsure whether this issue is caused by the "Software Infobox" or "Latest stable release" template, or whether it stems from a server-side problem in either Wikipedia or Wikidata. I encountered this issue in the "Visual Studio Code" article on the English Wikipedia.

Regpath (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried editing the article and then saving it without changing anything? That step is sometimes required to refresh the article's transclusions and categories. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it did not work. I think it is 'Infobox software' problem. It happens in multiple English Wikipedia articles, such as Visual Studio Code and Naver Whale, but not in the same article in different languages.

Regpath (talk) 07:07, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you identify which specific infobox parameters (and/or Wikidata properties) are not working as you believe they should? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:20, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regpath: The infobox at Visual Studio Code shows the latest stable release as "1.104.1 / 18 September 2025", which matches Wikidata. What is the problem? Also, your premise is faulty: a delay is absolutely acceptable to the MediaWiki developers. Wikipedia is loaded with instances where updates take anywhere from a few seconds to many months to propagate. I don't think taking months to propagate is a good idea, which is why I contributed ideas to T157670 and T132467, feature requests that date from 2017 and 2016, respectively. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Layout of the "initial release" field

See, for example, the infobox on Google Chrome.

The "initial release" field should make better use of the available width (which is a scarce resource), similar to how it's done in the "Stable release(s)" and "Preview release(s)" fields just below.

Note that "initial release" uses {{Multiple releases}}—which properly utilizes the full width in its documentation page example (not sure why the behavior differs here)—and is manually filled in the article page, whereas "Stable release(s)" and "Preview release(s)" fetch their data from Wikidata.

Od1n (talk) 17:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The other fields use {{Infobox software/stacked}} (or /simple), which creates a child infobox. Someone could probably play around in the sandbox to make the initial release section use that subpage as well. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiData issues

Hi, this template only quite sparingly uses references to wikidata which should be fixed to avoid issues with out-of-sync data because of manual copy and paste work.

Like e.g. the software license is not pulled from wikidata.

And the project website is incorrectly pulled from wikidata. It appears data25 always uses the very first entry it finds instead of the one marked as preferred or having an appropriate "start/end time" set. E.g. when a project migrated its homepage from one domain to another. Or moved the main project page from Sourceforge to GitHub or CodeBerg.

Can someone please update this template to use WikiData wherever possible, please? Agowa (talk) 04:31, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Agowa Hi, in fact some Wikipedias like Arabic version pulls all Infobox data from Wikidata.

For example see https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%84_%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%85

In my opinion, this strategy (which is possibly yours also) is not good because we should change "Wikidata computer readable data" into "human readable" one, and apply some style and linking to the text. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 05:49, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But your strategy leads to a lot of copy-paste errors. Like I recently fixed incorrect license information being shown because of such overwrites...

In general the WikiData objects already have the human readable versions attached. So when the templates are properly built they'll pull in the correct human readable version already. And for the infobox there is not much styling to be done. It is literally just a table with data anyway... Agowa (talk) 05:55, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about some Infobox items, but not all of them, because some of them really need human-readable style. Additionally, another problem is that pulling all data from Wikidata makes that vulnerable to vandalism. Suppose someone changes Website item of Google Chrome at Wikidata to his own website, and then it is applied to all versions of Wikipedia without anyone be warned. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 06:09, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, I should note that many infoboxes of Arabic Wikipedia, which implement "Wikidata pulling Infobox strategy", lack quality. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 06:16, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then the page at wikidata needs to be protected. The vandalism argument doesn't hold up as putting static and incorrect data into the overwrites is way harder to spot than it being incorrect in only one place.

Also such overwrites become outdated real fast. And then you're the one serving the incorrect data while it has already been corrected within wikidata.

And I said wherever possible. That at least should apply for way more fields. Like e.g. the License as it is literally just a link to the license anyway.

Finally not to mention that the current template sometimes overwrites the things people put into the "overwrite fields" within an article with the data it pulled from wikidata (didn't fully debug that one, just deleted the stale data within the article as it was incorrect anyway) and sometimes it does the opposite. Agowa (talk) 07:28, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even for License argument, please pay attention to License item of Google Chrome article, it is:

Proprietary freeware, based on open-source components

Whereas its Wikidata entry is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q777?#P275 rendered as:

freeware

So your idea about pulling Licese from Wikidata is not applicable. Can you make such sentence by Wikidata? Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 07:54, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Using Template:Hidden for multiple releases in Infobox

Hi, Infobox should provide concise and most important information of a concept, and it should not contain every non-critical data. In my opinion, for example in article Google Chrome, there exist 11 releases which all of them are not helpful, and reduces readability of article. The same scenario exists for many other software articles, e.g. Microsoft Edge. So I propose in the cases that there exist multiple releases, then Infobox hides these releases by Template:Hidden.

In my opinion, this strategy makes the article more readable. Please discuss. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 04:47, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 16 November 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I request that more module parameters be added to this template, as following:

Juwan (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

in the (current) line 122, these new parameter names (module2, module3, module4, module5, module6) need also to added. Juwan (talk) 15:45, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where are these parameters needed? Also, I have fixed the numbering above so that there is still room for new parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:00, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95 these parameters are needed in for example, the article for Kasane Teto (currently broken, see also Template talk:Infobox character). Juwan (talk) 16:09, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh, you did see and did fix. how nice! Juwan (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]