Template talk:Navboxes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Usage

To group together Navigation boxes

• title=Title of this box
• list1=The templates to be grouped such as

{{Navboxes
|title= Giovanni Trapattoni Navigation boxes
|list1={{Italy Squad 1962 World Cup}}
{{Italy national football team managers}}
{{Republic of Ireland national football team managers}}
{{A.C. Milan managers}}
{{F.C. Internazionale Milano managers}}
{{Juventus F.C. managers}}
{{Bayern Munich managers}}
{{Cagliari Calcio managers}}
{{ACF Fiorentina managers}}
{{Italy Squad 2002 World Cup}}
{{S.L. Benfica managers}}
{{VfB Stuttgart managers}}
{{FC Red Bull Salzburg Squad}}
}}

which gives

Succession boxes

If succssion boxes are first a <span> is need to have the template display correctly see sample below

Add documentation

{{editprotected}} See User:Gnevin/sandboxGnevin (talk) 23:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. --- RockMFR 23:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Force collapsed

{{editprotected}} ,Can you add state=collapsed see User:Gnevin/sandbox1 for code. Currently if succession boxes as added with no templates the boxes doesn't collapse Gnevin (talk) 22:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Transfert du modèle vers wiki français

Je souhaiterais recuperer ce modèle pour le transferer et l'utiliser sur le wikipedia français ? Est-ce possible ou pouvez vous le faire tout simplement ?David.0390 (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC) I would wish to recover this model to transfer it and use it on the French wikipedia? Is this possible or can you do it quite simply?David.0390 (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Should be doable ,does just copy and paste the code and change the English to French. This template uses {{Navbox}} so you'll need to point to that or create that also.Sorry but my french is terrible so this is the best i can do for you Gnevin (talk) 10:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Adding list

{{editprotected}} Can you add |list = <span>{{{list|}}}</span> to allow a possible merge with {{Template group}} and also their is no need for the 1. I'll update links to this template using AWB Gnevin (talk) 00:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Change {{{list1}}} too {{{list1|}}}Gnevin (talk) 00:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I confess I don't understand this. You want to add a list parameter to the {{Navbox}} call in this template? But Navbox doesn't use a list parameter. What am I missing? —Wknight94 (talk) 02:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind ,further testing has shown this change doesn't work as i hoped Gnevin (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The code should be:

|list1 = <span>{{{list1|{{{list|}}}}}}</span>

to prepare for the redirect. Note this is a change to the existing code, not an addition like the original request. ~ Paul^T+/_C 23:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done Ruslik (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Thanks. Also, I just saw that there is also a {{{state}}} parameter on {{template group}}. Can the following change be made for the same reasons as above?

|list1 = {{{list1|{{{list|}}}}}}
|state = {{{state|collapsed}}}

I don't see any need for the <span> tag either so I have removed it. Sorry for not including this in the first place. Thanks for the prompt change!  ~ Paul^T+/_C 16:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done Ruslik (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Hiding navboxes

I don't see how this template is useful. Sure it makes the page tidier, but at the huge expense of making all the navboxes pointless if they can't be seen. The very point of navboxes is to link related articles in a way that can be easy for casual readers, most of the time a click on a navbox link is spontaneous because the link was visible to the user. Making someone open an all-encompassing navbox, then a list of navbox groups, then open the navbox itself, then finally being able to see what related links are available to them, is defeating the object and makes the very navboxes this template is hiding redundant. We should be looking at the individual templates that are useful and merging or deleting others, instead of removing any sense of usefulness from one of Wikipedia's best features just so the page height is a few pixels smaller. --Joowwww (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The trouble with Merging,deleting or removing template is one most pages the template is useful and can't be remove . Having too click open will hardly that much effort. Most examples of this usage dont include a sublist of navboxes but just navboxes and the navbox the user is looking for. Gnevin (talk) 19:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

If I may, I'd like to add that combining Navbars into a Template group and placing it at the bottom of an article, presumably where readers will wind up when finished reading the article, might be less daunting or overwhelming for readers. They don't see an overwhelming list of new links and articles to read until they have clicked on the "SHOW" link. Not all readers are fast readers, so this template is not the "speed bump" that some editors think it is. Some readers read the English Wikipedia in English as a second or third language rather than their primary language, and those readers might not read as fast as someone who has learned English as a primary language.

 —  ^{.`</sup>^) Paine Ellsworth<sup>diss`cuss} (^^`.  10:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The "Coord" template

{{Editprotected}} Just before the Succession boxes subsection, it states:

Important: Don't include {{coord}} in the group. This would prevent the coordinates from being displayed.

This isn't entirely true, as can be seen below...

(This one just shows degrees and minutes. Of course, seconds can also be shown if known.)

As long as the "display=" is set to "inline", the coordinates appear in all skins including monobook.

Perhaps it is time to change that note to read that...

The {{coord}} template can now be included in the group. Just remember to set the "display=" parameter equal to "inline" thusly: {{coord|18|30|N|64|30|W|display=inline}}. The {{coord}} template can even be nested in a Navbox titled  Geographic locale, which is already found on many country pages.

(or something like that)...

• PS. Also note that the info in the template can be bolded just like regular text can be.

• PPS. This is certainly a learning process for me. Experimenting shows that if the "display=" value is changed from "title" to "inline" then the coordinates appear in all skins, even in the "monobook" skin. If set equal to "title", then the coordinates will only appear in the "simple" and "myskin" skins, but will not appear in all the other skins, including the "monobook" skin. Of course when you use "inline", you lose the "Coordinates" link just before the globe, which links to "Geographic coordinate system", however that can easily be added back in manually. One has to consider, though, that somebody is probably working on a fix for the Coord template, and how manual inputs may not be needed at some point in the future; then all those manual entries would be redundant and have to be removed. Perhaps its better to wait for the fix than to edit in all those manual entries?

Snag

I like this template and find it quite useful, but I've run into a snag on the article Testosterone, where the shell only includes the first of the four navboxes. I've looked at the navboxes involved and don't see any obvious non-conformities, and I think my implementation of the shell is correct. Could someone more knowledgable than I take a look and see what they can see? Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Some recent problems

In the past week or so, I have been noticing a problem with the template. Once I add the {{Template group}} and close it after the navigation boxes and save the nav boxes in side of the template will not show. Is there something new to do? Thanks. Nascar1996 23:00, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I think I may have figured it out. I wish you did not make the redirect change because everysinge article that had it is now not working properly. Uhhhh. Nascar1996 23:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I did figure it out nevermind (it also wasn't the above). I was putting 1= instead of list= :) 23:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Threshold for number of navboxes

I've recently started seeing this template being used with as few as two or three navboxes on a page, which is really too small for it to have any benefit to outweigh the cost of hiding the individual navboxes. I would like to suggest that the documentation recommend that this template not be used if there are less than five (or so) navboxes on the page. The exact number is of course open to discussion, but I think five is an appropriate number. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 03:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Whether to use this template should be in the realm of normal editorial decisions, depending on the state of the article, but if we're going to set a minimum reccommended number, 3 would seem better to me than 5. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Problems with change of Mediawiki version?

Has anyone noticed any change in the operation of this template since the changeover? When I added it to the Headache article, it only seems to enclose the first navbox, at least with FireFix and the MonoBook skin. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

It's the same under IE as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Font-size

Hi. The current font-size setting for the templates grouped by this template is too small, i.e. it makes the links listed within the templates more difficult to read and the dots between them almost invisible. Please, therefore, replace the line

|liststyle = padding:0px;font-size:111%;

with

|liststyle = padding:0px;font-size:115%;

i.e. increase the font-size specified from 111% to 115%.
213.246.117.201 (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I can expand it to 113%; this would counter the original navbox font-size of 88% better. 115% makes the font too big (bigger then the original navbox font size). — Edokter (talk) — 15:44, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine now -- thanks. 213.246.116.224 (talk) 12:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Display problem

For some reason this template is displaying the text "Template: Navboxes" instead of the template itself at, for example, Isreael#External links and New York City#External links. Fixing the problem is beyond my capability. Anyone here who can do the repair? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 11:44, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

fix for state = off

currently, the value for "navbar" is set to "plain", which is perfect in all cases except for when "state=off", in which case it should be set to "off". I added an ifeq in the sandbox to fix this. a demonstration for you:

Live version

Sandbox version

so my request is to replace the current code with this version of the sandbox. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 15:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks good, so Done --Redrose64 (talk) 17:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Why not simply pass {{{navbar|plain}}} and let the editor have some freedom in the matter? — Edokter (talk) — 09:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Problem

I can't seem to get the shell to work on MDMA. It looks fine in section preview, but doesn't showup properly when I save. You can see my results here and in my next two edits. I tried purging the page, but no joy. Any ideas? Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing basically wrong with your code (although the first instance shouldn't have had the unbalanced closing </span>); the problem is that wrapping the navboxes in the shell takes the page over the expansion limit. The usual indication of this is that instead of being expanded, there is a link to the template instead. In these cases, this is present as the link to Template:Navbox. A check of the page source code shows that the link is there: <a href="/p/https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Navbox" title="Template:Navbox">Template:Navbox</a>. This is immediately followed by an error message:

<!-- WARNING: template omitted, post-expand include size too large -->

To "shell" the navboxes, you really need to reduce their complexity. But is it really necessary to have all of them? It's normal practice to show only those navboxes which have a direct link to the article concerned; the article name then shows in black boldface. Looking through them however, only a few have MDMA. The others should perhaps be removed as not directly relevant. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I as unaware of this limit, and your advice re: removing some of the navboxes is a good one.Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion (default titlebar background)

Hi. As I understand it, this navbox can expand to show other (collapsed) navboxes within it. Currently, that means that this template's titlebar background is usually the same as those of any Navbox or other Navboxes titlebars around it. This can make it difficult to discern this template's titlebar from the others, i.e. show that the others are grouped below it. So, how about changing this template's default titlebar background to e.g. something lighter, e.g....

...rather than...

...? CsDix (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

...No thoughts either way, so:

Here's the amended code. The change is the background:#e8e8ff; in the titlestyle parameter (a colo/ur between the #ddf;s and #eef;s I've seen used by Navbox / Navbox|child) and it can be overridden using {{{titlestyle}}}:

{{Navbox
|navbar = {{#ifeq:{{{state|}}}|off |off |plain}}
|title = {{{title|Links to related articles}}}
|list1 = {{{list1|{{{list|}}}}}}
|state = {{{state|collapsed}}}
|titlestyle = background:#e8e8ff;{{{titlestyle|}}}
|liststyle = padding:0px;font-size:113%;
|listpadding = 0px;
|tracking = no
}}<noinclude>

{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

CsDix (talk) 12:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Done; thanks. Nyttend (talk) 14:06, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! CsDix (talk) 06:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

state = autocollapse

{{Navboxes
|title = TITLE
|state = autocollapse
|list1 = {{Navbox
         |navbar = plain
         |title  = ASDF
         |list1  = asdf
         }}
}}

The resulting box will collapse after the page is loaded. Even though state is set to autocollapse, the presence of the Navbox in list1 will cause the collapse of both boxes. Given the fact that the intended use for this template is to contain other boxes inside it, there will be virtually no situation where the box will autocollapse, so setting the state to this value is pointless. Perhaps the template's documentation should be updated to reflect this?

This behaviour is caused by the createCollapseButtons function in MediaWiki:Common.js (the second for loop). — {{carismagic|6 February 2014, 09:15}} —Preceding undated comment added 09:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

complexity

FYI, if you check this version and scroll down to the very bottom, you will notice that managerial career boxes are not appearing. this is due to the added complexity of passing the navboxes through {{navboxes}}. however, I was able to fix it by switching to {{collapse top}}/{{collapse bottom}}. it seems that we can dramatically reduce the complexity by rewriting this template to simply append something like {{collapse top}}/{{collapse bottom}} to the top and bottom of the list of navboxes. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 16:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

It fails because the Post‐expand include size has hit the maximum. This is not a proper fix, just a band-aid. — Edokter (talk) — 19:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

what is the proper fix? Frietjes (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Clean up the page, or lua-fy this template. — Edokter (talk) — 09:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Limit of templates?

There is a limit of templates in the | list1 = parameter? Because I'm editing Dorival Júnior, and when it reaches 15 templates, it stops showing all of them. With 14, it's working just fine. MYS77 ^✉ 17:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Strangely, the |list1= parameter in the navboxes template on Vanderlei Luxemburgo includes 16 navboxes with no issue. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 13:35, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

This is the same problem mentioned in the section above. Horrible navbox bloat on all these Brazilian football managers. Set up list articles for the managers of all the teams that have played in Série A, and one navbox "Lists of managers of Série A teams", whose entries would be these lists. Then get rid of all all the Brazilian football managers navboxes. The system can't cope with all these navboxes, which are a bad idea anyway. See Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. By the way Vanderlei Luxemburgo does have a problem: scroll to the bottom and you'll see that it can't display Template:Navboxes colour for the same reason. NSH002 (talk) 14:16, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

@NSH002: I don't think Navboxes is a bad idea, it compresses the whole bunch of manager templates quite well, in my opinion. But after checking the section above, I copied Parreira's collapsible box and adjusted it to Dorival's article, thanks! The problem is that Brazilian clubs tend to change their managers more quickly than almost every other country in the world... MYS77 ^✉ 02:17, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

MYS77 - the bad idea isn't {{Navboxes}}, it's the idea of having all these Brazilian football manager navboxes in the first place; they should probably all be nominated for deletion. The problem with {{Navboxes}} is that it effectively doubles the transclusion size of all the navboxes within it (which is why it hits the limit), but that can be fixed by re-writing it in Lua. In the meantime, Vanderlei Luxemburgo (and probably others) need to be fixed in the same way as you have done for Dorival (ping Jkudlick). Regards, NSH002 (talk) 06:58, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Succession boxes: incorrect border

Does anyone know how to fix the formatting at Template:Navboxes#Succession boxes? Once expanded, the horizontal lines are all coloured white instead of grey.--Nevé–selbert 21:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ahecht: Neve-selbert means that in the following two examples:

the horizontal border separating the rows is clearly a kind of mid-grey   (actually #a2a9b1) in the first example, whereas in the second it has an unexpected colour, almost (but not quite) white   - being #fdfdfd which is an extremely pale grey (although the border might appear to be absent, it is in fact present). It seems that this CSS rule:

table.wikitable > tr > th,
table.wikitable > tr > td,
table.wikitable > * > tr > th,
table.wikitable > * > tr > td {
  border: 1px solid #a2a9b1;
  padding: 0.2em 0.4em;
}

is being overridden by this rule:

.navbox-spacing-temp.navbox tr + tr > th,
.navbox-spacing-temp.navbox tr + tr > td,
.navbox-spacing-temp.navbox-subgroup tr + tr > th,
.navbox-spacing-temp.navbox-subgroup tr + tr > td {
  border-top: 2px solid #fdfdfd;
}

I am certain that this is a consequence of this proposal, and I have dropped a note there. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's it. The plan was to get rid of .navbox-spacing-temp at some point. That'd be a good time to tighten up the selectors:

.navbox-inner > tbody > tr + tr > th,
.navbox-inner > tbody > tr + tr > td,
.navbox-subgroup > tbody > tr + tr > th,
.navbox-subgroup > tbody > tr + tr > td {
  border-top: 2px solid #fdfdfd;
}

Should stop nested tables from being affected. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:37, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you.--Nevé–selbert 15:59, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

I broke it, but I can't take credit for fixing it! User:Ahecht fixed {{S-start}} with an inline style border. I've requested a fix to the site CSS, so with luck that'll go in soon and avoid similar problems in other templates. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Site CSS was updated a few hours ago. It no longer applies the light gray border to tables nested inside navboxes. Should be safe to revert the {{S-start}} fix. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I went ahead and reverted the workaround that I put in place on the succession box templates. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Background color

Proposal withdrawn

I would like to go to a slightly different default background color: #e8ddff (prev. #e8e8ff). Feel free to remark here in this discussion, or, if strongly against, to revert to the previous background.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  07:47, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: The new color is too purple-ly... Can you explain your reasoning behind the change? Right now I'm against the change. Corky ^{Buzz by the Hornet's Nest} 22:59, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

To editor Corky: Thank You, and I do realize the need for general subtlety in the bg color; however, for a long time now, I've been thinking that the present bg color appears a little too faded and pale. So I thought I'd give it just a little more color. It's not a big deal, of course, as I've been thinking about this for a few years now.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  09:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I know it's a bit pale, but personally, I would prefer a more neutral color... like a light grayish color. Corky ^{Buzz by the Hornet's Nest} 22:15, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

And please set up a demo showing navboxes with the two colors. Johnuniq (talk) 06:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

To editor Johnuniq: Thank You for asking! I've set up the sandbox with the comparison.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  09:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Any chance of a page somewhere showing two navboxes, one traditional and one proposed? Your link shows a diff which would need quite a lot of confidence to interpret. Johnuniq (talk) 09:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm just not sure what is needed beyond the comparison in the sandbox. The only reason I used the diff template was in case another editor were to edit the sandbox. The diff provides a permanent record of the comparison, and the comparison shows both the traditional navbox bg color and then my proposed bg color just below the traditional one. The two navbars are also seen in the "Sandbox" section of "Test 1" on the test cases page. Please explain in detail exactly what more you need.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  10:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry, that's my banner blindness. I skipped over the diff and stopped skipping at the first navbox I noticed, which is in the documentation. I'm watching this page due to having done a major refactor of the module and I hope some others will check the rationale for the color. Johnuniq (talk) 10:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

No worries, I've altered the sandbox to place the comparisons closer together and erased the /doc page. Hope that helps.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  11:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: Please confine Template:Navboxes/sandbox to the proposed version, it should not contain the current version as well. Side-by-side (or one-above-the-other) comparisons may be done at Template:Navboxes/testcases; more at WP:TESTCASES. A benefit of this approach is that you can see what it looks like in articles by going to an article and altering {{Navboxes}} to {{Navboxes/sandbox}} and previewing. Then there are all the links at the bottom of the green documentation box which only work as expected if the sandbox and testcases are set up in the normal manner. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

The change in the sandbox has been made.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  01:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: As you know, {{Navboxes}} is template protected, and you used your template editor permissions to make this change. Per Wikipedia:Template editor, "slightly tweaking something's color" is listed under "Changes that require at least some discussion, or at least several days passing with no one commenting on your proposal". The opportunity for discussion should've happened before you made the change. Personally, I oppose the change and agree with Corky — it's too purple-ly. If anything, I think the navboxes should be less saturated (something like #EAECF0) --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Apologies if I broke with protocol, Ahecht; however, I just don't see in that quote where the proposal must wait until after discussion. Just didn't think it was that big a deal – an obvious error on my part. Happy Holidays to All!  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  01:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

V·T·E links?

Any idea if there is a way to add the View/Talk/Edit links to the top left like a normal {{navbox}}? I don't see any option for this in the documentation, but maybe I'm missing something? - Paul^T+/_C 03:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Psantora, at the moment, there is no option. Generally, this template is used directly in articles, so V-T-E links are not needed. If you want to use this as part of a template, there are usually better options. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Plastikspork, thanks for the response. I understand that usually this template is used directly in articles, but I know of at least one example (and I bet there are more) where it is used in a template to include multiple related templates with just one transclusion. In the case of Template:ARM-based chips, it could make sense to have separate V-T-E links since it is a standalone template that includes 3 other templates. In theory this should be possible to do, right? - Paul^T+/_C 17:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Psantora, yes it's possible to modify this template to add V-T-E links to the wrapper template. However, since the content is in the other 3 templates, it's probably better to just have edit links to the other 3 templates. Also, it looks to me that Template:ARM-based chips is being overused, since in most cases only one of the three subtemplates is needed at the foot of the article. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:50, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

By the way, this tool is a great way to analyze this "lack of bidirectionality" by showing places where the navbox is transcluded, but there is no link to that article in the navbox. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:53, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Why is there a closing span tag in list1= ?

Does anyone here know why editors would have put a </span> tag at the beginning of |list1=, as in Victoria's Secret#External links? There are a few hundred instances of this tag, which are causing a "Stripped tag" (closing tag without an opening tag) Linter error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Warning

This template should come with a health warning because if you have so many Navboxes that you need to subgroup and hide them that you almost certainly have too many Navboxes.

Navboxes seems to get away with being included indiscriminately, held to none of the standards we would require of a single link if it was in in WP:SEEALSO or WP:EL -- 109.79.86.113 (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm serious, ordinary Navboxes are junk and these Navboxes to contain other Navboxes are another layer of awful and should come with warnings against their usage. We have guidelines against unnecessary links, we warn editors against indiscriminately every genre or category they can think of and we have MOS:DONTHIDE. Yet somehow we have this template which not only encourages editors to add even more unnecessary barely relevant Navboxes it makes it worse by hiding the linkdumpster under another layer of templates and ignores all the principles that seem to apply elsewhere. (The fact that mobile wikipedia doesn't bother with them at all is further evidence of how entirely non-essential they actually are.)

This template should come with a warning discouraging editors from using it, at least gently suggest to editors that maybe if they're hiding and subgrouping Navboxes the answer might be less Navboxes. Please improve the documentation to encourage editors to show some small amount of restraint when using this Navbox subbox in particular. It is bizarre when an article has more content hidden in Navboxes (and sub Navboxes) than it does in the article itself, and maybe there are exceptional articles that really do need more than 10 Navboxes but they should not be added indiscriminately then hidden away. -- 109.79.168.251 (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Even something as simple as improving the examples or suggesting that maybe it is a good idea to avoid deep sub sub layers, (great that it is possible, not such a good idea to actually do it) but as it stands now this article tacitly encourages the behavior. (Look for yourself, open the examples all the way, and tell me you really think having a sub sub layer about political "Alliances" is really a good way to arrange anything.) -- 109.79.168.251 (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Stop deleting Talk page comments. I'm not merely expressing my opinion about Navboxes in general but in this template in particular making the problem worse because it implicitly encourages too many Navboxes, and hidding Navboxes. -- 109.79.169.24 (talk) 11:29, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

This is not the right page to discuss whether this template should exist. If you would like to nominate it for deletion, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I didn't say it shouldn't exist (maybe it shouldn't) but that it should include documentation or warnings to editors to consider not including so many Navboxes before using this template. I'm skeptical but I suspect there are some cases where this template might actually be necessary. -- 109.79.169.24 (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

This is a wiki. Documentation pages for templates are almost never protected. If you make an edit and nobody objects, your edit will remain. If you make an edit and someone objects to it and reverts it, you can discuss it further here. So far, what I see is a lot of words, but no concrete proposal for changing this template's documentation. If you want to propose a change, one good way to do it is in the form "I believe that we should insert the following text after the sentence that ends 'foo bar': 'Blah blah blah etc.'" – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:56, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll need to give it more thought to come up with a specific wording. I thought people with an interest in this template might have insight about the particular cases and maybe respond and say why this template was actually good or necessary, or why it really was reasonable for articles to have more than ten Navboxes or any number of Navboxes large enough that this kind of repeated subgrouping and hiding was a good idea. The indiscriminate proliferation of Navboxes seems very much in contrast to other cases where editors make efforts to be more selective, such as genres, categories, WP:SEEALSO, or WP:EL. (Oh and MOS:DONTHIDE)

So far what roughly what I would propose is

“ Less is more. Before using this template to group navigation boxes together, consider carefully if a page needs to include more than a few Navboxes that are most relevant to the primary topic of the article. ”

That's a rough first pass. I'm not as optimistic about adding to articles and not expecting to be reverted if things haven't been discussed. WP:NAVBOX says "All articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject." but some editors have a very expansive interpretation of words like "single subject" and "coherent" mean (example: Teen Titans Go! To the Movies has more than ten hidden at the end of the page, but only the one that isn't subgrouped using {{Navboxes}} seems like it is of primary relevance.) I think I will need time to dig deeper and read more of the guidelines (and talk page archives), because if it was me reading the documentation and trying to decide what "relevant" means I would want the documentation link back to something like WP:NAVBOX or elsewhere to help make it clearer, make decisions easier, and disputes easier to avoid or resolve.

At this point it would also be instructive to see examples of articles where {{Navboxes}} really was needed to organize and structure large numbers of Navboxes into groups, and weren't just being used to hide excessive Navboxes, and sweep the mess under the rug. -- 109.79.84.100 (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Jonesey95 for directly addressing my suggestion. Wikipedia often changes small pieces at a time, and I dont think it is unreasonable to try urge a little caution against the worst cases of too many Navboxes (sub sub Navboxes) and not be expected to take on the whole policies of Navboxes in general. The short bit of quoted text above says pretty much what I think, and a small extra bit of text like that is all I'm looking for, not a large banner or a huge policy debate. Rejecting discussion and saying I have to take on much larger Navbox policies in general seems like a very indirect way of saying no a small incremental change that I believe is in keeping with existing principles and guidelines. If people think the suggestion is so bad then say so, or if think it is acceptable then say so. -- 109.78.197.121 (talk) 23:44, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

• Warning: Template talk pages, like article talk pages are WP:NOTAFIRUM for general discussion about the subject matter, they are solely for discussing potential improvements in the template. FORUM-like discussion are subject to deletion at anytime, per WP:TPO. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:37, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

It is exactly because of the Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines that warn editors against deleting other peoples talk page comments, that I was so surprised to have my comments deleted. My complaints are about Navboxes in general but also about usage of this template in particular as exemplifying and encouraging the worst cases of excessive Navboxes, I don't think WP:NOTAFORUM applies. Disagree with me, ignore me, but my comments are on topic and I don't think deleting was an appropriate reaction in line with the Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines or WP:GOODFAITH. -- 109.79.84.100 (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

You are not discussing the improvement of this template, you are attempting to discuss how this template is used. That is not a matter for this talk page. Please go to WP:VP and open a discussion there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm talking about making a small change to the documentation on this page, to include a short cautionary warning. If people can agree to a small change similar to what I am suggesting above, then I don't need (or particularly want) to get into larger general discussion at this time. -- 109.79.84.100 (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

That still needs to be discussed elsewhere, not here. You first have to establish the need, which you have not done (you personal opinion not being relevant), and then get a broad consensus for it. You don;t get that here, you get that at VP. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:55, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

If we are to provide some such warning, it ought to be shown at WP:NAV and also WP:NAVBOX. So a discussion in a central place - like WP:VPR - is far better than this template talk page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:19, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Maybe "warning" was too strong a word, that implies more than I intended, which I suppose you could call a minor edit to the documentation. To show exactly what I mean I decided the most practical thing was to make an edit, I don't think it is a bold change to suggest that editors keep the Navboxes relevant. -- 109.78.197.121 (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I've reverted your edit to the template doc; That something like that needs to be added is only your opinion, you have not established any consensus for it. In fact, I can't see that anyone has agreed with you yet. Please do not re-add it without a consensus, such behavior is WP:DISRUPTIVE and can lead to being blocked from editing. See WP:BRD. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Embedding tables into Navbox

Neither the hlist nor the column format are useful for what I am attempting, which is to incorporate a conventional wikitable into a Navbox, but all I get to show is a {, and no mention of someone doing the same anywhere has come up in searches - so, is there a workaround, or is there an alternative that I can convert the basic wikitable into without having all the data in the utterly impossible to follow (and therefore maintain) order mandated by the navbox with columns? Cheers. - NiD.29 (talk) 06:22, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

If you link to a sandbox page where you are trying to do this, we may be able to help you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, it is here - was initially attempting to do both a colspan and a rowspan in the headers but that doesn't appear to have been implemented on the column naxbox - which also has the data entered in the least editor-friendly manner possible for future maintenance. - NiD.29 (talk) 07:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Without even following the links, I can tell you what the problem is: pipes. A navbox is a template, and templates use pipes to separate parameters. In a line like

|list1={|class=wikitable

the Wikitext template parser sees this as two independent parameters: |list1={ and |class=wikitable, so it assumes that list1 is merely a left brace. Wikitables using the normal {| markup use the pipe character heavily: in the markers to start and end the table, to indicate the start of a caption, new row, or data cell; and to separate a cell's value from its attributes. These must be entered as {{!}} throughout, as in

|list1={{{!}}class=wikitable

See the Wikitext below the example at Help:Table#Nested tables. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! that fixed one problem, now to figure out the formatting, but that will be for tomorrow, much appreciated. - NiD.29 (talk) 10:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Recent change

Hi! I have re-ordered the #if: check so that it now suppresses all output if there is no content. It shouldn't increase the code complexity since we already had this check before my change. You can find the list of the ca. 50 pages with empty navboxes in Category:Navboxes template with no content. I was thinking we might add a "preview" message to warn the user that the code is not valid, much like we warn when there are invalid parameters. What does everyone else think? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:53, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I think that a normal-sized-text red error message in preview would be appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:37, 31 May 2020 (UTC)