Template talk:Unbulleted list citebundle/Archive 1

Documentation

I have WP:BOLDly created a first cut at documentation for this template at Template:Multiref/doc.

I have also created a redone version of this template at Template:Multiref/sandbox which supports the documentation.

Please verify that what I have done is correct, fix it if needed, and make the sandbox live. Alternatively, please otherwise provide documentation.

Note: I noticed in examining Leyden jar, which uses this template, that the usage there differs from the expected usige I have described in the documentation. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The first parameter is expected to be a short introduction... No, it isn't. The usual usage is just a ztraight list of references. I've occassionally used the first parameter to write something like "For instance, see," where the cite(s)s are to example(s) of the thing being discussed rather than a verifying statement for the thing being claimed, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

Distributed-element circuit is a good example of how this is meant to be used. The usage example would probably be clearer if some actual (dummy) citations were used instead of ABCD.

There is a spelling error in that same sentence ("susequent").

The template is most commonly used in conjunction, and was designed for use, with shortened citations, but it will work with full citations if desired. Is that what you meant by the usage in Leyden jar? SpinningSpark 20:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Intentions were not clear without documentation. If I got it wrong, please correct my first-cut version. Where I've done this without the template, I've put an intro to the grouped discussions on the initial line. That made snese to me as the initial line is set off from the others by the presence there of the footnote number and the backlink(s).. I'm not trying to argue my stylistic view here, though. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Wtmitchell and Spinningspark: - so what's happening with this? - wolf 02:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I have not done any more with it. It's not something I'll use, so I don't plan to do anything with it. Interested editors could improve it; see Wikipedia:Template_documentation. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Template update

Hello,

I've changed this template so that there's now a |text= parameter. Bullet points can also be shown by specifying |bulleted=y. Hopefully people will use this template for its intended purpose (showing a list of references with text at the top) and use Template:Multiref2, which I recently made, for a plain list of references in one citation without text at the top. DesertPipeline (talk) 08:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I've reverted that. If you want a template that enforces a text field then by all means create a new one or make it an option. Don't impose it on articles already using this template. The default should remain at the status quo ante. SpinningSpark 14:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Templatestyles

At Wikipedia talk:Lua, DesertPipeline asked:

Let's test this in Template:Multiref/sandbox2 for now. I've moved that there; I also changed div to span, as div caused a problem with the linebreaks. However, it seems the margin thing isn't working. Any idea why? DesertPipeline (talk) 12:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

The reason was that templatestyles CSS applied margin-left:1em;to the element div.plainlist, which was added by {{unbulleted list}}. This change was made to match the output of the existing template. Your sandbox version doesn't use that template so you would need to add an alternative target.

In testing existing uses I noticed that many of the uses were not as described in the documentation (a header followed by list with the indent) and were just lists of references. Now I read this talk page I see that this is an issue that has been discussed. It's not clear to me which use is most prevalent. —  Jts1882 | talk  12:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Unbulleted list of references is the predominant (and originally intended) use. A very small number precede the list with a text note in the first field. Also worth noting is that I envisioned this only ever being used with shortened refs, but there are a few articles out there which have inserted full citations. SpinningSpark 13:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be helpful to change the documentation to reflect that? The documentation and design of the template (i.e. position of indent) suggest another use. I've never seen the template before and was just responding to a technical question asked elsewhere. I took the documentation in good faith. —  Jts1882 | talk  14:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

I'll take a look, I didn't write it and I thought I had removed the incorrect information once before, but apparently not. SpinningSpark 14:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Anyway, regardless of the primary use, the alignment can improved. If you look at the alignment in Template:Multiref/doc the top reference is not aligned with the rest (you can also see this at Vacuum_tube, ref 33). Unless you use the timeless skin, that is. The offset is skin dependent. They appear aligned in timeless (using margin-left:1em;), have a small offset in vector and monobook, and a large offset in minerva. Moreover, there is a substantial offset in the pop-up window.

This can be fixed using TemplateStyles. The offsets can be customised for the different skins and only applied to the reference list, so that they are aligned in different skins and in the pop-up previews. The CSS can be seen in Template:Multiref/styles.css. —  Jts1882 | talk  16:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Jts1882: I should mention that Multiref won't use the unbulleted list template when the changes have been made. That only works if there's a first line of text above which is unindented; otherwise, all of the text in the reference view appears a line below the "[num] ^" line. Also, on the testcases page, which is showing results from Template:Multiref/sandbox2, only paragraph two is showing as indented. I think there needs to be a span tag for each line? I'll do that now and see. DesertPipeline (talk) 06:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I think I got it working correctly. DesertPipeline (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I've updated the documentation with some examples. The examples are made up but the use cases are all found out in the wild. I've removed the line about a text field being expected – that always was complete nonsense. SpinningSpark 08:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Jts1882: Please can you figure out the correct margin-left value for the different Wikipedia skins and add them to the styles page? Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 09:47, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I did add them to {{Multiref/styles.css}} but there seemed no consensus to add templatestyles to {{Multiref}} (although it should improve the alignments). These assume the use of the unbulleted list template and one of the classes it adds. There is an example of simpler CSS with class multiref2. This could be extended for other skins, but I don't want to get caught in the middle between different concepts of {{Multiref}}. —  Jts1882 | talk  10:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Jts1882: Thanks. I intend to use an unbulleted or bulleted list only for Template:Multiref2; this won't need the styling that this template needs. Can you change it so it doesn't require the list? Presumably if it's enclosed in span tags with a certain class, it shouldn't need to identify it by it being a list, right? DesertPipeline (talk) 10:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I've created {{Multiref2/styles.css}}. Your template will need to take the form:

{{{HEADER-TEXT|}}}<div class="multiref2">LIST</div>

The exact indents may need adjusting. —  Jts1882 | talk  12:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Jts1882: Are you able to remove the requirement for the element to be a list? I only intend to use this styling with Multiref, which won't use a list. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 05:43, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean Multiref2? As stated above, I've removed the unbulleted list requirement for class multiref2. All cases only apply the indent in the reference list, not in the popup previews. It would help if I could see examples of what you are trying to do as otherwise I'm working blind. At the moment {{multiref2}} is a list without the introductory text, whereas I thought you want a template with the introductory list. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:13, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Jts1882: Sorry. I guess I didn't explain myself that well. This template (multiref) will have an optional text parameter and multiref2 will have a mandatory text parameter; multiref2 therefore doesn't need this styling. See Template:Multiref/sandbox2 for what I intend to update the code to. DesertPipeline (talk) 07:30, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I just tested it with the multiref2 styles.css code and the popup boxes for references also have the margin. Can this be fixed? DesertPipeline (talk) 07:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I've changed your sandbox to use the CSS styles in {{multiref2/styles.css}} using class multiref2, as I suggested above. It seems to me that it does what you want to do: adjust the indent in the reference list for different skins and have no indent in the popup preview. If it's not working you need to state the example which isn't working and the skin you are using.

I think the best approach is to get what you want to work in {{multiref2}} and leave {{multiref}} alone as a simple unbulleted list. Once the option text is working there, a merge can be considered if there is consensus the changes are transparent. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Weird results in mobile version

The output looks very strange in the mobile version: open https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Multiref and look at the examples. The vertical spacing between the first two lines is smaller than between the rest. All lines after the first have unexplainable indents.

And by the way, does this template have any benefits compared to simple manual insertion of <br/>/{{br}} between items? — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Note about using full refs in this template

"[Full references can be used in this template] but this may not be so useful" – why? It'd be nice to know if this is because it buggers up CS1/CS2 formatting, or for other very pressing reasons.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 19:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't bugger up anything, the statement is more about intended use. The usefulness of this template is in combining multiple specific pages of different sources into one shortened ref. Doing that with full citations would probably involve repeating the full citation multiple times. Even when the repeat is the same combination of sources (which it rarely is) the page numbers will be different so using a named reference won't allow bunching them together. SpinningSpark 23:51, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Difference between Multiref and {{Unbulleted list citebundle}}

Is there a difference in functionality between this template and {{Unbulleted list citebundle}}? Rjjiii (talk) 20:26, 17 June 2023 (UTC)