Template talk:In5

Template for approval: Template:In5

Swept in from the pub

@Twsabin: created this template on Friday and per our ridiculous template policy, it sadly needs consensus. I strongly support using this template; the purpose of the template is pretty self-explanatory. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I'd prefer your not calling our policies ridiculous, as it shows little respect for consensus, and such respect is needed for our working together. I think it is very good that this template, like other ones, needs consensus. It might be useful, but where to use it needs to be discussed, as it adds a formatting option not previously available (without using bad or complicated markup). The purpose is obviously to make that formatting option easily available, but the intended use is not documented, nor self-explanatory. Were in our guides should be put 45 consecutive spaces (as in the example)?

I saw it used in multi-paragraph listings. We should probably adjust the listing template to accommodate multiple paragraphs in the content parameter, create a template for that specific use, or discourage multi-paragraph listings. If a listing needs more than one paragraph, it should perhaps be changed into a subsection.

Are there other use cases (not counting templates)?

–LPfi (talk) 11:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

LPfi, this discussion is specifically about the use of {{In5}}, not my opinion regarding templates. In5 is self-explanatory, at least to me because In5 = 5 indents by default. {{In5|8}} might seem a bit confusing but it's an easy-to-use template. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

So it is, but your comment prompted a reply. The template may be easy to use, but its intended use is not documented nor self-explanatory. Where is it intended to be used? I discussed one use case and asked whether there are other ones. Is its use to be recommended wherever an editor thinks it fits? If it is used instead of semantic markup, it may degrade the accessibility of the site. I don't see where indentation is needed other than at paragraph breaks, where it should be handled by the wikitext line breaks being converted to HTML paragraph breaks (with associated CSS) as appropriate. –LPfi (talk) 13:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Why does the name not follow wikipedia:Template:Indent, which has also been adopted on five other Wikimedian wikis? "In5" is a lot more ambiguous than "Indent". I also looked at a few places where it is used on Wikipedia and from the small sample it was used to indent footnotes/references and words in infoboxes, neither of which are really applicable here. Gizza ^(roam) 13:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

It could be used on routeboxes so the names of cardinal points are in line. Regarding the template name, I'd support your proposal to move it to {{indent}}, though I do realise that Wikipedia has both w:Template:Indent and w:Template:In5. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 13:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it is appropriate to use it in routeboxes or similar templates in that way. Now the road sign image and the cardinal point names on each side are centred as a unit. If the images on each row are of equal size, then the names will be neatly on each side. If not, then the   is much too course to align anything. And we don't want people to tweak the layout of templates on each page were they are used, the logic of the template should handle that (for consistency, ease of editing and conservation of labour). –LPfi (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

All this template does is add five plain old spaces. It could be replaced in practice by "     " (that's a series of five spaces, alternating between regular and non-breaking spaces so that the parser won't collapse them into a single space). It doesn't give you paragraph breaks, so it will not solve the multi-paragraph listings problem. It is currently used in Nordic countries#Understand, inside the blue box, to change the location of Template:See also. The importer also documented this use at Wikivoyage:Information boxes.

I'm not convinced that we should be using {{see also}} inside the information boxes (IMO the links should be inline), but if we are going to, then it is reasonable enough for editors to want some method of producing the expected visual appearance, whether that's through spaces or a template.

SHB2000, as a side note, I would like you (and every editor at all of the wikis) to consider adopting the ethical stance of not personally enforcing any consensus that you happen to disagree with. That is, please don't violate the agreement yourself, but if someone else does (or might have), you can let its actual supporters address the (potential) problem themselves. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

If we want a see also in the information boxes, then let's add a parameter "seealso=" and put the indentation logic in the infobox template, with in5 as a helper template if needed, but I assume CSS is the better solution. –LPfi (talk) 16:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Why is this linked to Template:Indent (Q5618727), not Template:In5 (Q8129687)? The link suggests that it has the wrong name. If we must have this, I would prefer the name of "indent". I don't see why indenting by 5 would be so common as to be the default. "In" is a word and I wouldn't automatically think of it as an abbreviation. Conversationally "in 5" means "in 5 minutes" - so an editor might expect this to give a 5 minute break! AlasdairW (talk) 21:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. I'll also add that even the German Wikivoyage also uses this template, and has no issues with this template. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Still, where is it to be used? Three uses have been proposed: fake paragraph breaks, adjusting centring in a template and adding seealso or footnotes to infoboxes. All involve trying to add functionality or fix style issues in templates in an ad hoc manner. Those templates or the usage should be fixed instead. We could keep the template and tell that it is to be used as a temporary fix where needed, and that any such use should be noted on the "fixed" template's talk page, for a discussion on whether it is the template or the usage that should be fixed. –LPfi (talk) 06:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I think it's also quite convenient for tweaking table spacing/padding (less use of direct markup makes it easier to follow the table in wikitext); example: Special:Diff/4506969. I'm sorry I hadn't started this discussion myself, as soon as creating (via copying) the template—and included at least several use cases in the proposal. I wasn't fully cognizant of the template policy, although I remember seeing if not quite absorbing that page (I got that templates are used much less than on a certain sister project, but the basic idea that prior consensus is required for every template didn't stick). I think that this template is technically well implemented and documented, unobtrusive, and has highly varying niche uses which don't have to be seen negatively as ad hoc solutions, and support that it be kept. Twsabin (talk) 17:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Twsabin, that brings us back to what LPfi has been saying about doing it properly in the first place. In that diff, you saw this:

°C	°F
40	104	sweltering

and you thought it would be nice to have a little visual space separating the color coding from the text, so you added this template:

°C	°F
40	104	sweltering

which results in five copy-able spaces being added to either side of that red border, which will cause problems for anyone who wants to copy and paste that into a Word doc or Excel spreadsheet. It looks okay on wiki, but why didn't you just fix the table's formatting directly, like this?

°C	°F
40	104	sweltering

That doesn't introduce any superfluous spaces, it's guaranteed to work, and it will never cause funny line wrapping (which might look fine on your screen but be broken on someone else's screen, due to differences in screen sizes, zoom sizes, and font sizes). Have you heard the saying "If all you have is a hammer, all you will see is a nail"? If all you have is a template that inserts spaces, then you might not realize that the solution you really need is in w:en:Help:Table. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I am familiar with wikitable formatting and understand what you're saying very well (I did say less use of direct markup makes it easier to follow the table in wikitext). What prompted me to try out this example of usage is that it's mentioned in the documentation (meaning it was presumably an accepted practice from where it originated). In this specific instance I am pretty sure the spaces could never produce any rendering problems, but I haven't considered the issue of copying the table to MS Word etc., which is a good point. All in all I agree that it's a bad example, and I take it back. Twsabin (talk) 08:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I don't expect Twsabin to fully follow the template policy when it literally violates WV:PF, especially when no other wiki has such a restrictive template policy (but thankfully m:IAR can be used here). But back to the template, what if you were to insert 32 spaces? Surely it would be a pain clicking the space button 32 times, wouldn't it? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 08:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Any policy can be seen as violating Wikivoyage:Plunge forward (which is what WV:PF refers to). That's the wrong way to look at it. Plunge forward says [more or less] that you don't have to check policy or do it the right way, somebody will improve or revert your edit if it was faulty (this discussion is totally in line with that). Meta:Ignore all rules (m:IAR), the status of which is unclear, says: "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining a project, ignore it", but e.g. en-wp, from which the principle is counted refers to the fifth pillar, says "guidelines [...] are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time". Guidelines still play a role, they shouldn't be ignored just because you think you know better than the community. Nowhere do the pages tell you to ignore consensus. –LPfi (talk) 09:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, but a policy telling that every single edit needs prior consensus is; that's why IAR can be used here. But this is not a discussion about Wikivoyage's template policy – I simply brought that up because Twsabin simply wasn't aware of it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

> what if you were to insert 32 spaces?

Why would you want to insert 32 spaces? WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, so maybe there won't be a situation where you'll need to insert 32 spaces, but I will add that some autocorrect softwares will automatically remove those extra spaces as superfluous. I have one that does that, but I've disabled it on all English-language Wikimedia sites. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you ever need to insert any more than the usual one or two spaces? (Two spaces seems to be preferred by people who learned to type in English on an actual typewriter, which is no longer common.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Re: "Do you ever need to insert any more than the usual one or two spaces?" The reason why this template was created – in tables like the one in Metric and Imperial equivalents. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

It's not used in any of those templates, and I don't see any place where it would be appropriate.

Keeping in mind the difference between "I need extra spaces" and "I need bigger visual gaps between elements in a table", when do you actually need spaces? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)