Template talk:ArB
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] ZERO WIDTH SPACE
Can one of the authors please explain why ​ is used here? On my browser (I'm forced to use IE) this displays as an empty square - pretty annoying, so unless there's a good reason to include it I'd recommend its deletion. -- H005 07:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] deprecate
this should be deprecated. We don't want templates (let alone transcluded ones) adding "boldface" (come on). Use
- [[Arabic language|Arabic]]: '''{{lang|ar|xxx}}'''
instead. dab (ᛏ) 11:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- This template is used, and your argument is... "come on". I like the way it formats and I use it all the time. Is there some policy that says we can't use bold? Arabic script is usually too small and can't be read well. When it's only used once it doesn't create a formatting issue by making it bold. Cuñado
- Talk 18:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- My argument is perfectly obvious. Deprecating a template does not imply that it is not in use, but that it should not be, and if you'd leave this alone, bluebot would take 10 minutes to fix it. I agree with the Arabic script size (on some browsers). This means you should add intelligent code to the lang template, not create swathes of independent templates for all conceivable script styles. This is about intelligent markup and template transclusion, it is not a content dispute, and I wish you would give the problem five minutes' thought before jumping on me and wasting my time. If you think I am objecting to using boldface you haven't understood what I am talking about (and I remember spending ages trying to impress a perfectly simple point concerning hamza on you earlier, so I really begin to think that the problem is on your end somehow: try to listen first) dab (ᛏ) 19:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- This template is used, and your argument is... "come on". I like the way it formats and I use it all the time. Is there some policy that says we can't use bold? Arabic script is usually too small and can't be read well. When it's only used once it doesn't create a formatting issue by making it bold. Cuñado
-
-
The templates are useful because when arabic script is used to translate the title of an article, which is also in bold, the arabic text also should be in bold. The default lang-ar template produces text that is not bold, and in my mind quite unreadable. Notice that in the arabic and persian wikipedia's the default font size is larger than the one produced by the default arabic font in the English Wikipedia. In addition to making the arabic script match the latin script in the lead (both being bold), the boldness makes the text more readadble. -- Jeff3000 19:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- dab, if you can show us a markup that does the equivalent of the current template, then that's fine. template:lang doesn't do the formatting that this template does, not just the boldening and size, but it adds the [[Arabic alphabet|Arabic]]: in front. Cuñado - Talk 20:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- for boldface, use ''', like everyone else
- things like "Arabic" should be added manually, case by case, or at best subst:ed if you are into that, but not transcluded
- I am not opposed to keeping these templates around if they are deprecated and used with subst: to save you time typing. This template should then include transclusion of {{lang}}.
- if you want to argue for general presentation of Arabic script in a larger font (this is debatable, since not all browsers will display it alike), you should propose conditional code to be inserted in the monobook stylesheet for lang="ar" spans. It is important that people can just type {{lang|ar|...}} to get properly formatted Arabic. A change to {{lang}} (such as browser-aware code to account for IE deficiencies) will then take effect on all Arabic snippets, wikipedia-wide (something that is not possible if we handle Arabic over six or seven disparate templates). The purpose of {{lang}} is to enable centralized syntax, it is built carefully to get properly formatted text from {{lang|[ISO 639]|...}} for any language. Language specific tags should be strongly deprecated in view of this, as they lead to fragmentation of wikisyntax.
- in general remember that you cannot just hack articles to look right in your browser. such issues of layout must be handled in the stylesheet.
dab (ᛏ) 11:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- In regards to some of your points:
- Templates are used to make things easier and less manual (imaging having to type out what is produced by [citation needed] each time), so having a template that also includes the ''' in conjuction with something else is not unreasonable.
- After working on disambiguating, I know that most people when linking to languages link to the dab page like Persian. Having the link to the language directly removes any need for dismabiguating work which is not getting any smaller.
- This template makes Arabic look better in IE, Opera and Firefox (on Windows, Linux, and Solaris). The OSs I have access to, so this is not a case where this is making it look better on a specific browser/OS/resolution.
-- Jeff3000 13:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- I experimented with {{lang}} but there are no instructions on how to use that template and how to do mark-ups. If you can increase the size to 1.1, then we could make the code for this template like this:
- [[Arabic alphabet|Arabic]]: '''{{lang|ar|1.1 markup|{{{1}}}}}''' {{unicode|}}
- Cuñado - Talk 03:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- I experimented with {{lang}} but there are no instructions on how to use that template and how to do mark-ups. If you can increase the size to 1.1, then we could make the code for this template like this:
I'm adding a {{helpme}} tag which might help you get a quicker answer to these questions. I suggest making a concise list of what you need to know below (I haven't read the questions in detail and it's not an area I know a lot about). Antonrojo 14:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
