Template talk:Policy list

message: Is this intended to be an all-inclusive list of policies?  If so, where are all the rest?  If not, what selection criteria are being used to create the list?  Rossami (talk) 02:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a summary of policies, its the ones lubaf and I talked about on IRC (while we can add more remove some). These ones are the more notable policies which newbies should learn first. If we put everything newbies will not bother reading anything. --Cool CatTalk|@ 05:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Policy selection

message: I strongly recommend that we jettison all the images.  They ridicule the policies and make it even less likely that the new users will take them seriously.  The images distract from the template and from the point of the policies.  Rossami (talk) 02:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I modifed the images abit how do they look? --Cool CatTalk|@ 05:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree that all the images must go.  Then the template can be narrowed somewhat (perhaps by having the top text on two lines, since that's the only part that's the full width).  Right now this very much dominates the page, which is not good. -- SCZenz 05:45, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The images simply don't look good. I don't know what the hell that thing is at the top, and the guy "biting" the "newcomer" is just silly. Jettison the images unless you can come up with one for each category that really captures the idea behind it, and make them all look thematically the same. android79 06:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about now? Thanks to david gerards restructure now it is much much better. --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:24, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Locke Cole wrote, in an edit summary, responding to a line of mine:
:by padding I assume you meant margin? (padding is internal, margin is external)
Yes, you're right. Thank you for your help. The template is no longer either butt ugly, or buggy. (Posted here because it is of interest to everyone interested in this template.) Thanks, Luc "Somethingorother" French 09:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. =) —Locke Cole 09:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Locke Cole 

message: I've removed this page from the template. This page is most certainly not a policy page, despite the lone author's claim that Wikipedia:Facts precede opinions is a corollary to WP:NPOV. Even if it were a corollary, it is still not policy.  — Saxifrage | ☎ 04:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Facts precede opinions]] 

message: I added * Work towards consensus under Working with others. I can't believe it wasn't there already. LambiamTalk 16:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus guideline 

message: On Firefox 1.5.0.3, each link is way too close to the ones above and below it. It looks pretty bad. Can someone who knows what they're doing try and increase the between-lines spacing? Thanks! drseudo (t) 06:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO you should do this, I've no clue what your problem is. For starters I've removed cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 and some CSS about padding, but not all, because if there's a general problem from your POV it affects all templates in the category. -- Omniplex 05:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is solved by removing the line-height: styles. I don't have access to any popular browser other than Firefox at the moment so I have no idea if it will look sensible in e.g. Internet Explorer - someone else will have to verify this. Hairy Dude 18:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

text: On second thoughts, I've decided to be bold and do it anyway. Hairy Dude 18:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad spacing 

message: For a discussion about the edit link see the  talk page.
For issues like align=right (floating), colour scheme, width, and line
breaks see the  talk page, it's more or
less the same problem for various "sidebar" templates. -- Omniplex 05:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout questions 

message: I think it would be very useful to add active guidelines to the list - or at least a link to a main guidelines page that *does* have a list. Actually I think this list could also be made more prominant, as I've been to the policy pages (NPOV, NOT, etc) many times, but have actually never noticed the list on the side! Fresheneesz 06:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This template is about official policies. I'd like to add WP:BB or WP:SNOW to the list, but they are apparently no official policies at the moment. -- Omniplex 14:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is there a list of guidelines? Fresheneesz 07:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the bottom of the policy list WP:LOP the "See also" offers Wikipedia:List of guidelines, a very new page, they asked for help to create it some days ago (I forgot where I saw it). -- Omniplex 07:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding guidelines to list 

message: My edits, were reverted by Slim. She gave the reason for the revert simply as "was better". I respect the fact that she has the capacity to form opinions of this kind, and in case anyone is interested, my favorite color is blue. A more substantive or responsive reason would be nice. - Stevertigo 08:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Processes is not a policy (it looks like you wrote the whole thing today), neither are WP:FIVE or WP:ENC. It doesn't make sense to add them to a template called "Policy list". It's as simple as that, and nonsensical edits do not generally elicit a substantive response... (Sarcasm doesn't increase the chance either) -- Quiddity (talk) 02:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit conflicts 

message: Should this template include a link to the Wikipedia:Five pillars, which is generally held to be a summary about our official policies designed for new editors, rather than an actual, official policy itself?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:44, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five pillars 

message: *Keep No evidence it hurts anything. CarolMooreDC 21:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Responses

message: The MOS template has a "Search the MOS" feature, which is very handy. Is it possible to add this to the Guidelines? ThanksDig Deeper (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: 123HHcomAlex 45.225.195.195 (talk) 13:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible to add '''Search the Guidelines'''  search bar option? 

message: The template links to the Principles page which, as a newcomer, I unfortunately find rather confusing and not providing much insight. I have left a more verbose description of my concerns on the corresponding talk page. Depending on the appropriate course of action, the link should be removed or replaced. I appreciate any feedback or guidance on how to proceed. CSMProject (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to confusing "Principles" page