Template talk:Refbegin

message: Hi Edokter, I've restored this after your removal, but I had forgotten you were the one you added it. It's useful for people who have difficulty reading the smaller font size, but where editors want columns. This template with columns and normal font-size option does the trick. Sarah (SV) (talk) 16:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that refbegin should not be used just to have columns; we have  for that. Refbegin should only contain references and act like {reflist}/, which does not have a normalfont option. So I am merely trying to synchronize its behaviour. It still works, but I removed from the documentation so there will be no more new uses. -- User:Edokter  16:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I'm not sure what deprecated means in this context. Refbegin with normal font is useful when people want to list citations using columns and 100 percent font size, because otherwise they're forced to use 90 percent, which may be too small for readers and editors with eyesight problems. I can't see a problem with telling people that it exists, i.e. I can't see a reason to limit new uses of it. I had to go hunting for it after coming here and not finding it; then I realized it had recently been removed. Sarah (SV) (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: My ultimate intent is to remove it. The 'too small' argument doesn't hold anymore, especially since the Typography update last year. This is something that should be solved on a user basis, not in the template. There are also only 61 uses of the parameter out of a total of 91463 transclusions. That really doesn't justify keeping this parameter anymore. It also stands in the way of consolidating other column templates in the future. -- User:Edokter  16:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you say what you mean by deprecated and unofficially deprecated (as in the edit summary)? Also, when you say remove it, do you mean stop it from working or remove it from this page so that people won't see it? Sarah (SV) (talk) 16:57, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said above; it continues to work but is removed from the documentation only. Within the year, the option should be removed from the template alltogether, at which point it will stop working. -- User:Edokter  17:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, could you say what you mean by deprecated? If you are personally planning to remove it from the template, would you mind gaining consensus before going ahead? I think some people do find it useful, so it would be good to discuss it first. Sarah (SV) (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you know what it means. Yes, I do plan to remove it, simply because of under-utilization, ie. it is hardly used anyway. -- User:Edokter  17:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, this is a very inefficient discussion. :) If I knew what it meant, I wouldn't ask, and I've seen you use it before, which is why I'm asking. "Deprecated" normally means that an organization has decided to stop offering support to people who use a certain piece of software, or a certain version. I don't know what it means when an editor says it on Wikipedia (and I would have preferred that you not add it above my post as though I had written it). So, please, explain what you mean by it, so that I know for this and future occasions. Sarah (SV) (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

text: If the  small font size is an accessibility issue, then so is the font size of ,  and many infoboxes. But this is why we have . --  Gadget850 talk 19:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal

message: , I restored this for now, as it seems quite useful. Is it that the template no longer offers it, or that no one is using it?  SarahSV (talk) 06:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You said the exact same thing half a year ago. For one year now, I am trying to get rid of any options that keep my from harmonizing all column templates. So I will remove it again from the documentation, and later from the actual template, so I can finally start working on building a generic columns solution for reference templates. It is only use on 60 pages anyway. Please do not restore. "Seems usefull" is not what I call a a very strong reason for inclusion anyway. -- User:Edokter  10:18, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

text: To add, if you want regular fontsize columns, use  instead. -- User:Edokter  10:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Font size (2) 

message: Lists using  display incorrectly on mobile browsers using the mobile site. The left margin falls off the edge of the screen. See images and their description pages for details. Hairy Dude (talk) 14:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Found this by chance today, guess better late than never. This is gonna be hard to fix, mostly because it was never implemented wisely to begin with (our habit of using : for indentation biting us once again). I think we should just let it be for now, hopefully in the future, when it will be possible to have stylesheets for a template, this will be easier to fix. FFR: This should have been 0 left margin, 1.6em left padding, -1.6em text-indentation for these definition description tags. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: And I mess up the ping.. :)  —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:55, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  indent=yes on mobile 

message: No indent
:Colon indent
* Refbegin with indent 
Is there a reason why the default indentation size is so severe? I would think that the width of a single colon indentation would be more appropriate (see example above). czar 05:57, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think 1.6 would be good, to keep it consistent with single-colon commenting conventions. I'm only discovering the indent function of this template now (after having used it for how long?) but the 3.2em indent is jarring. czar 19:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been googling a bit, and I suspect that this is based of pre-existing conventions outside of Wikipedia. If you google a bit for "style guide hanging indent", you quickly find that ASA-style, MLA, Chicago etc all dictate 0.5 inch indentation, which I think is rather close to that 3.2em. I'v added an example of that below as well. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:54, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indent size 

message: Given that :Template:Reflist now defaults to 30em, should this template behave in the same manner? My instincts say it should. DonIago (talk) 13:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Default columns? 

message: I'm not sure why the current practice is to use an unordered list, but almost always the lists employing these templates have been ordered (usually by e.g. last name). Could we at-least add support in the CSS for an ordered list inside of these templates? --Izno (talk) 16:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: But all the other reference lists are unordered chaotic jumbles, so readers might become disoriented if they find one that's ordered. EEng 18:20, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ordered list rather than unordered list 

message: Under VE the cite list should be searchable or the citations should be numbered, finding one specific citation block is irritating and tedious.
Example: Analytical_Engine#Bibliography MarMi wiki (talk) 22:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  VE edit suggestions 

message: Per Template:Reflist#Example, would I be correct in assuming that  is depreciated, defaulting to 30em as if 30em had been specified? If so, then Template:Refbegin's documentation should be updated. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 12:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depreciated parameter 2 

message: Based on the discussions above, I'll update the documentation to remove instructions for adding a quantity of columns. I wonder if it would be acceptable to prevent the template from outputting column counts? This seems easier than writing a bot to fix them all. The vast majority of specified quantities are just "2". Here's a breakdown:
2	15,000
3	600
4	30
5	13
6	0
Rather than continuing to implement this, the template could just give "30em" which is the default for references. Or 30em for 2 columns, and 20em for higher. Or even ignore the counts altogether. This would fix any issues with editors specifying a fixed number of columns. Rjjiii (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps disregard the above post. After some digging, the template is widely used for non-ref purposes as a small text plus number of columns template. See this legend separated into columns on Schizophrenia for example. Rjjiii (talk) 18:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh, that is a misuse of this template. The template contains various CSS classes and styles that are applicable only to references. It should not be used for other purposes. That legend should use  or one of the other column-generating template families listed in the documentation for that template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cleaned out the 3-5 column usages. Using Izno's search syntax I don't see any more pages left. I've also converted a bunch of misuse (thanks for the  link). There are still the 15,000 pages left using refbegin|2. I tried modifying the sandbox version of the template to give "30em" when a number of columns is requested. Rjjiii(talk) 03:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Making notes as I go: I've cleaned all of the  usage down to  and have made the sandbox treat  as if the 1 was not there. 2 or greater as a column count will creates 30em wide columns. Rjjiii (talk) 06:16, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing column count? 

message: Change the template to the sandbox version. The live version of the template permits defining the column width or quantity. The sandbox version only permits defining the column width and provides a fallback where any quantity of columns will result in columns at 30em (the default for references). The current default of 1 full-width column is still present, and a quantity of "1" will also give that default of 1 full-width column. Per talk page discussions, this is more flexible and matches the updates for . Additionally, I have converted all uses of large quantities of columns (3–6) in articles to either narrow columns or a more appropriate template. Once all 2-column formatting is updated, the fallback can likely be removed.  Thanks for your time, Rjjiii (talk) 00:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:55, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 7 October 2023