Template talk:United States presidential elections

wikipedia Wikipedia view on Wikipedia

US election templates[edit]

This discussion also includes: Template:U.S. House elections, Template:U.S. Senate elections, and Template:U.S. gubernatorial elections.

I reverted to the standard format used for all 200+ templates. As they all appear on the List of election results by country article, it looks very bad to have differing formats. Number 57 10:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • But other than that one page, these templates are used on about 100+ other pages. Why would you affect 100+ pages for the sake of consistency on one page?—Markles 11:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Because it is easier to keep to a standard format and if one template is excepted from the norm then others will be and chaos ensues. Additionally, I find navbox generic quite ugly; the templates are so small they hardly need a hide option. Number 57 12:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with Markles in that I don't like to see changes to a template being reverted because they made one page look bad, when hundreds of others look better with the standardized templates. As far as them needing the Show/Hide option, most of the standard navigation templates use this option now. In addition, these templates may be small, but there are articles with lots of small nav boxes at the bottom, and their total sizes can add up to be quite large. Also, if you don't like the way Navbox generic looks then you could suggest changes on the relevant talk page. -CapitalR 15:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with CapitalR and Markles. I'd like to see all footer templates, infobox templates etc. use a common styles – and that is most easily done by using either css (that is, class="navbox" etc.) or by using templates like {{Navbox generic}}, {{Navigation}} and the like. Using class="toccolours" with arbritary widths, colors and text sizes is, in my opinion, a step in the wrong direction. –Fred Bradstadt 16:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Why? If all templates were identical it would make them far less aesthetic (as opposed to keeping templates in a series identical). People implementing navbox generic across the board have made a mess of many templates where the change just isn't appropriate. Number 57 16:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

rough suggestion, comparison old-new[edit]

Section by century[edit]

I suggest separating the list by centuries. It's just to make it look clearer so readers can find the date quicker. In short, it's for clarity, but nothing else. I don't think other election templates do this. Is consistency with them necessary? (And if so, should we consider changing them all?)

As follows:

What do you think? —Markles 12:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a bad idea. If you have a smaller screen resolution, the entire rows don't fit on a single line, creating large gaps in the template. There is nothing wrong with the existing system, which as noted, is used on all other templates like this. It could also look a bit odd on other templates if they only have a single election in one century (the eighteenth century row here in extremis). To summarise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)