Template talk:Article stub box
(Redirected from Module talk:Asbox stubtree/doc)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Article stub box template. |
|
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
| Related pages |
|---|
Vertical space
[edit]Isn't it excessive? See, e.g., Dynamics_(mechanics)#See_also. fgnievinski (talk) 00:37, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Fgnievinski: This is Template talk:Article stub box#CSS edit request following on from Wikipedia talk:Stub/Archive 16#Replace double-blank-line method with CSS. You get the same gap whether you precede the stub template with one, two or three blank lines - two was the recommendation at WP:STUBSPACING until a couple of months ago. But also per WP:STUBSPACING, the tag is in the wrong place anyway, which I have fixed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:19, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the pointers. Above it was said:
- the space now above the template is IMHO generally excessive to the need
- I'm inclined to agree with you that the current spacing is somewhat excessive, but a separate discussion would be needed to form consensus to change that.
- the space now above the template is IMHO generally excessive to the need
- With that, it's three people pointing out the CSS spacing is excessive: me, @docwatson42, and @User:Mr. Starfleet Command. I suspect the issue arose because stub templates were not always transcluded preceded by two blank lines. fgnievinski (talk) 17:07, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- I also agree that the spacing is excessive. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- The spaciing is the same as it had been before, provided that you had followed the placement guidelines and used two blank lines between the categories and the stub template. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- And yet it's still perceived as excessive. Can we at least agree on how many complaints it's necessary to action a change? Ten people would seem a reasonable number. fgnievinski (talk) 12:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
- The spaciing is the same as it had been before, provided that you had followed the placement guidelines and used two blank lines between the categories and the stub template. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- I also agree that the spacing is excessive. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the pointers. Above it was said:
CSS spacing does not work when the Coord template precedes categories
[edit]See Special:Permalink/1308943116 for example. When the item immediately preceding the categories is the {{Coord}} template, the extra vertical spacing does not show. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
- The CSS that adds the vertical spacing is set up so it doesn't apply if the stub box is immediately preceded by an HTML
<p>element (paragraph), so that it doesn't produce too much space in cases where the old method is still used (two blank lines before the stub tag, which creates a blank paragraph). Apparently, the {{Coord}} template generates a paragraph. - Depending on how many pages still use the old method, we might be able to remove the
:not(p)from the CSS. That would fix cases like these, but would double the space on pages still using the old method. But I have no idea how many pages still need to be fixed in that way. Does anyone else have input on this matter? Mr. Starfleet Command (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2025 (UTC)- A vast majority of pages probably still have the double spaces. This was the first time I noticed one being removed. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2025 (UTC)