Forum:Should all multiple listings in infoboxes be bullet pointed?
Bullet pointing in infoboxes has always been a little bit fiddly, involving a bit of typing to make it work correctly (as you can't use asterisks). I've recently created a bullet pointing template; Template:bp. With it bullet points can be added very easily within infoboxes.
To take a random story Death of the Doctor the Setting and Enemy fields are bullet pointed but the Featuring field isn't.
So, should all multiple listings within the inbfoboxes be bullet pointed? --Tangerineduel / talk 13:09, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
I think that the usage in each article should follow its own logic. I understand your desire for an overarching format, but I fear that you may be overly taken with the technical delights of your template and the not uncommon feeling that everything should be either forbidden or compulsory -- indeed, I sometimes get the feeling that some people want everything forbidden and compulsory. But I digress. Let each piece operate by its own logic. Boblipton 13:29, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I don't really understand what Boblipton is trying to say. Tangerineduel is simply asking for an arbitrary stylistic standard. This thread is a completely ordinary attempt to add definition to our (largely arbitrary) manual of style. There's no logic involved here at all; it's just an up/down vote. The template helps to facilitate bullet points, but he's not asking whether we should mandate that people have to use {{bp}} in order to effect a bulleted list. He's just asking if we can set a standard that bulleted lists should be used in infoboxes. This thread is akin to previous ones in which we've decided whether to use American or British spellings, how we should spell K9, how we should style the names of stories, and a whole host of other rather "fiddly" issues.
- Personally, I applaud the innovation of the {{bp}} template, but think that bulleted lists are inappropriate for an infobox. Bullets take up space in an already cramped area. The point of an infobox is brevity, and bulleted lists inevitably extend the vertical height of an infobox. I'm all for simple, comma-separated lists, myself.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 13:19:00 Fri 05 Aug 2011
My apologies for not expanding on my explanation sooner. I do disagree that just because we've decided some 'fiddly' issues, we should solve them all. Some are matters of generally held beliefs of consistency, like how to spell a word or name. Yes, those should be consistent. But bullets are a STYLISTIC issue and should be considered on an individual basis. Please bear in mind that every rule that is added to how to contribute here means one more thing that has to be remembered. It raises the barrier for someone thinking "I'd like to fill in that article. Let me see what I have to know." Yes, I know that we seem to be overwhelmed -- from my perspective -- with people who can't spell, punctuate or express an idea simply. However, it is my -- perhaps wrongheaded -- belief that if they see their work polished, they might come to understand the reasoning behind those efforts and learn thereby. Keep the barriers to entry low by keeping the rules simple.Boblipton 13:40, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
- I must remember not to use words like "fiddly" in the future, maybe I should have gone with something else...
- I agree that comma lists are good in some circumstances, as are just lists each separated onto a new line via <br>.
- But sometimes, especially with the setting field, when you get to multiple listings bullet points help immensely because of the information listed is often long and just having them separated onto a new line often didn't make it clear. Here's The Left-Handed Hummingbird as it is now and a previous edit, while both are clear, with bullet points it makes the information far clearer.
- With the setting field at least I think they're an aid to brevity because there's an instant recognition of how many settings there are in the story.
- I am more looking for consistency of style across the infoboxes, as there isn't any I think mostly due to the aforementioned fiddly nature of bullet pointing within them. While I understand Boblipton's comments about making it easy for people to contribute, I also want a consistent experience across the wiki, and that means apply the template in a consistent way across the all the infoboxes in use. Currently some are, some aren't, it's been applied seemingly randomly, that's what I wanted to get a clear idea on so I can remove them when they're applied incorrectly or add them when they're not present. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:32, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
I have no objection to bullet points. I have strong preferences about some things and I go around, 'fixing' them without insisting that others do likewise.... and sometimes I see a case where I would have used my preference, and by gum, the way it is is better. So if you like bullet points, put them in. After all, it's usually easier to get forgivenness than permission. And 'fiddly' is fine. It's an inherent part of editing.Boblipton 14:38, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
