Template talk:PhysicsNavigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Template:PhysicsNavigation: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:

    Contents

    [edit] Removed link to "others"

    I removed the link to "other" contributors to physics because it showed up as a redlink the way the template was transcluded on Big Bang and similar articles. 71.174.226.117 20:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

    I've reverted your change, as it broke the template. Please be more careful when you edit templates in the future. Thanks. Mike Peel 21:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Extra Space

    Is there a way to get rid of the extra space between the "topics" and the "scientist"? --Mr Minchin Canada 20:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] The collapsed subsections look terrible

    The point of a navbar is to be able to find your subject quickly from many subjects by eyeballing them. The default-collapsed subsections make that impossible without clicking a bunch of "[show]" links first, and they look weird and unprofessional. All the "[show]" links clutter the visual field. MilesAgain (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

    Thanks for your Comment MikeAgain, but you'll have to see the other side. The Cosmology template is now far too big to be included in several smaller but important articles, plus it destroys the proper alignement of pictures in other articles. I added the uncollapse support few hours ago, so that the bar uncollapses per default on the topic your browse. I think this is the best solution, but if you know other don't hesitate to tell me, I appreciate any feedback. I could imagine to wholly uncollapse the template in case you browse the key topics. Please see Template_talk:Quantum_mechanics where the idea started and Template_talk:General_relativity where it was even debated completely removing the Navigation template ! {Sheliak (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)}
    I do not understand. See Star formation,(fixed link -Wikianon (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)) (I have since reverted the template call in that article to the one from here) where the template subsections appears collapsed and stay collapsed when I move my mouse over them. Is it possible to add a "collapsed=show" parameter so that it behaves like the TOC? For star formation the fully uncollapsed template is not at all unwieldly. -Wikianon (talk) 21:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Letters are too cramped to be legible

    Your 80% font size leaves the letters to cramped to be readable. Please restore size to 100%. JRSpriggs (talk) 07:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

    I changed size to 90% seem not perfect but OK on the Internet Explorer 7, Epiphany is perfect. 100% Is too big, this introduce line breaks in caption and so on. Hope this is also OK, on your browser. If not, feel free to play around in User:Sheliak/Sandbox/Template:PhysicsNavigation and User:Sheliak/Template:Physics and tell me whats best in your case. Sheliak (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    OK. That 90% works for my Firefox browser. Thank you. JRSpriggs (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Rename template

    I'll soon drop the Physics prefix in the template's name as I realize that it is now also used outside physics. But I'm not sure how to name this template, just Navigation is not appropriate, maybe index ? Any suggestions ? (Sheliak (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC))

    [edit] Larger image? Wider box?

    Image size is small. Is there a reason why the box width is 210? Can it be made variable based on user preferences? I would prefer to see larger image. For example: magnetic field, it is difficult to read the text and refer to the image, since it is so small. Thanks, Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 22:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)