Navbox rugby league squad is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby league, which aims to improve the quality and coverage of rugby league football related articles. Join us!Rugby leagueWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby leagueTemplate:WikiProject Rugby leaguerugby league articles
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
reverted to Rugby League standard. Believe there may have been a discussion within the community about the width but could not find it on quick inspection.Londo06 12:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the change has affected all the boxes. Reverted back. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 08:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The standard navbox size should be full-width, and there has been a push across Wikipedia recently to conform to these standards. I cannot see why we shouldn't change to accommodate this change. MDM (talk) 08:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a push by one user. Purely from a visual point of view it is worse, a number of boxes were tailored to the set width as well. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 09:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm for 100% width. A bot went thru and changed them all recently. Let's just end it and go with the standard. No reason not to.--Jeff79 (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If that is the case, someone wants to go through and sort out all the navboxes which have been fixed for the 80% width. As per Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/Navboxes they were right before. If someone wants to go through all the league boxes to make sure they look proper. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please rephrase your latest comment. Also, why, after seeing this re-reversion of your edit, did you go to the user who changed the width originally (and also created the Wikipedia navbox template) and oppose his request for adminship? MDM (talk) 15:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The change in width has thrown up a few problems, so I reverted it. Looked for our page list and there is a section towards the bottom. I am proposing that someone fit the parameters as 100% and the names to fit in there, if that is the route we want to take. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have no plans on interfering again and setting the width to 100% myself, but if you all decide that is the route you want to go, let me know if you need help doing any mass edits to articles/templates to fix width problems. I'm fairly skilled at scanning database downloads to find articles that need updating, and I'll be happy to help find and/or edit such articles for you. Oh, and the width edits I made weren't technically a bot, just manually approved WP:AWB work that I did to set most templates with at least 80% width to 100% to fix inconsistencies in navbox width in many articles (I also made those edits on a self-imposed one-pass rule: if anyone reverted me I didn't make any attempt to re-revert; thus, most were standardized without any trouble, but WikiProjects and users who watch the templates were able to quickly change back, or request I change back, any that they wanted to be a smaller width). --CapitalR (talk) 03:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}