Template talk:Collapsible list/Archive 1

Collapsed option?
It would be most helpful to a collapsed option when only one list is present. Can this be done? &mdash;MJCdetroit 17:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfotunately, I do not think this is possible. The list is implemented using NavFrame, and the documentation for this feature indicates that you cannot control the initial state, as best I can tell. &mdash;Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont)  11:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Sister template: Template:Collapsible list collapsed
I created a sister template that is always collapsed. It is located at Template:Collapsible list collapsed. While it would be best to have one template that has the option to collapse, this will have to do until someone can figure out how this can be done. It's beyond me. &mdash;MJCdetroit 01:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * With the tweaks described below, this sister template is not needed. It will be deleted.  &mdash;MJCdetroit 03:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

New options to always collapse the list and hide the borders
I tweaked the template so that it can always be collapsed by adding  and/or so that it could have its border hidden by adding. See the doc page or an example at the infobox on the Vancouver page. &mdash;MJCdetroit 03:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Corrected a bug with closing div tags
I have modified the code for this template to correct a problem with closing div tags. Previously, all thirty possible rows generated a  tag, whether the corresponding parameter was given or not. Now I have moved this tag inside the #if for that list item, and the right number of div tags is generated. &mdash;Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont)  11:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

navFrame doesn't work with if js is turned off
If your initial state is display:none and have java script turned off, then you can never expand the list... --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. I will remove the display:none; revert if there's a good reason for it. Gimmetrow 08:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

BUG---Item #1 on list not showing up? Any ideas?
Great Lakes States

Michigan

Ohio

Indiana

Illinois

Minnesota-->

Wisconsin

Pennsylvania

New York Great Lakes States

Michigan

Ohio

Indiana

Illinois

Minnesota

Wisconsin

Pennsylvania

New York

Notice how the first spot is blank instead of showing Michigan. Anyone have any ideas? &mdash;  MJC detroit  (yak) 15:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You need to delete the final pipe (as I've done in the active version above). I guess the parser treats the pipe as introducing another parameter (equal to nothing), and being the first unnamed parameter treats it as, overriding the value previously set for  .--Kotniski (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Those damn pipes! Thanks K, I'll fix the doc page. &mdash;  MJC detroit  (yak) 20:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hide/Show button in the middle of an infobox
See Bassar. Any ideas how to keep the hide/show button from showing up in the middle of an infobox but keep the list next to the infobox? &mdash;  MJC detroit  (yak) 16:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Broken list
This change to the template broke this template on other wikis. Can anyone explain why the  tag works here, but not elsewhere? On my wiki, I changed it to , but I cannot predict what that will do here. --Otheus (talk) 11:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit request
Hi. Please replace the current code with the following, which adds parameter names without underscores (framestyle, titlestyle, liststyle) along the lines of Navbox etc.



  

Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Center
Would it be possible to add a parameter to have the list entries centered? Bovineboy2008 (talk) 19:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Altering "hide" and "show" text strings
Are the "hide" and "show" links defined somewhere in the template, are they in a style-sheet somewhere, or...? I am interested in replacing "show" with a more descriptive word indicating what is in the hidden frame. DMacks (talk) 08:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Use class="NavFrame collapsed", not style="display:none"
If you use style="display:none" for the NavContent divs, then users who do not have Javascript will be unable to see the content. Every instance of ... ... should be changed to ... ...  —AlanBarrett (talk) 21:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. It's really bad that this was being done in the first place. --- RockMFR 04:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. —AlanBarrett (talk) 07:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Changing where Show/Hide appears?
S'me, Daedryon again, I just transferred this template to the Castle Crashers Wikia, and I am in need of assistance. Is it possible to change the position of the "Show"/"Hide" button? I don't want it to be all the way over on the right side of the page. 24.226.33.10 (talk) 03:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Initial state
Has something changed here? It used to be possible to control the initial state of the list (displayed or hidden) using "list_style=display:(something)", didn't it? Can someone update/remind me on how to do this?--Kotniski (talk) 10:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, hang on, this probably results from the change above, where the NavFrame class was replaced by NavFrame collapsed. What's the method now for making the list display initially, or do we have to use a different template - such as the Collapsible list expanded I've just produced?--Kotniski (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

This could be added pretty easily. I'll look into how other templates handle it (i.e., what to name the parameter) to keep everything consistent. — RockMFR 13:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added this functionality now. You can use  (or any non-empty string) to make it uncollapsed. — RockMFR 15:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

[Show]/[Hide] overhang
editprotected I have created a sandbox and testcases page for this template to illustrate the [Show]/[Hide] overhang outside the right edges of all the infoboxes that use this template. (See toward the bottom in the "Codes" section.) I'm not sure about other browsers; however, my IE7 shows this overhang in all nine skins. You'll note that the Infobox on the left is actually called from my personal sandbox, which is where I call the sandbox version of this template.

When the width near the top of the code is changed from 100% to 96%, this gives the best rendition of the [Show]/[Hide] link and brings the right end of the link within the edges of the Infoboxes. I'm interested to know how the testcases appear in other browsers. If the appearance of the left-side testcase is okay in other browsers, then I'd like for an admin to change this width to 96%. If the testcase does not look good in Firefox, etc., then perhaps a lesser or greater percentage should be used. At any rate, the width really should be reduced so that the [Show]/[Hide] link does not overhang outside Infoboxes. &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   10:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * PS. Here's the sandbox and here are the testcases.  Thank you very much!
 * Looks okay for me in IE8. If it's just a matter of IE7 being broken, then we probably shouldn't change it. — RockMFR 15:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, just to be specific, do you mean that both Infoboxes on the testcases page look okay? If the one on the right, which is the live version, looks okay to you in IE8, then you may be right.  Consider, though, that IE7 and even some of its predecessors are still popular browsers and widely used.  Also, while the live version probably looks okay in FireFox, it might still be a good idea to make this slight change in width even if the left Infobox looks okay in FireFox, too.  Remember that this is a "template's template" and it's used by many different templates for several different applications.
 * &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   17:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; it was fine in Firefox and Safari, but the bug did exist in IE7. If any problems occur, please tell me. The Earwig  (Talk &#124; Contribs) 19:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, The Earwig! Looks like we've nailed it.  Best of everything to you and yours!
 * &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   23:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

editprotected This change should be reverted. I was wondering why the lists suddenly became narrower. Where is the consensus for this? The fact that this was changed not even just without consensus, but even with opposition is a problem within itself. even states it is to be used for edits that are "uncontroversial or supported by consensus", neither of which applied. Even if there were many people that watched this page, which there are actually less than 30, how much discussion could have taken place in less than 13 hours? I think it looks horrible to have the button set in from the right side. Maybe someone should figure out the reason why it's bad in IE7 instead of making all the other browsers look bad. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Somewhat strong words for a mostly visual problem. It's not as if the thing stopped working, and I don't think that immediate reverting is required. However, I too would have cared to understand and document the problem with IE 7, before changing this, and still think we should try to understand this problem. I'm guessing it has something to do with absolute positioning, because the CSS for this show/hide element is


 * Why that would confuse IE7 is eluding me however. can we get screenshots ? —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 18:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure what is meant by "confuse", but then I'm not myself any kind of programmer. I see that the sandbox has been set back to width=100%.  I now use IE8 to edit Wikipedia, and the [ Show ]/[ Hide ] link once again hangs outside the right edge of the infobox in the sandbox version.  The live version still looks okay.  To answer MrKIA11, this was a "fix" to improve the way numerous infoboxes that use this template appear to numerous readers who use Internet Explorer to browse Wikipedia.  How professional is it to have links hanging off the edge of an infobox?  This was not a controversial change, this was a template repair.
 * &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   03:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

(out). I'm not certain, but it appears that this template might need a bit more repair. I have added two versions of the India-article infobox, Template:Infobox Country, to the testcases subpage. If this page is accessed with an Internet Explorer browser (confirmed for versions IE7 and IE8), then it can be seen in the sandbox version on the left that one of the collapsible lists, Constitutionally recognised languages has a [ Show ]/[ Hide ] link that extends beyond the right edge of the infobox. Please see my documentation on the sandbox page for a complete explanation. The version on the right side of the testcases page shows that a local change, removing the line break in Constitutionally recognised  languages brings the [ Show ]/[ Hide ] link back inside the right border of the infobox. However, I'm not certain that this local fix is a viable alternative. Can we receive other editorial opinions on this situation? Thank you for any and all help you can offer! &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   11:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * PS. Actually, an involved editor of the India article, Spaceman  Spiff , in a response on the India discussion page, pointed out that such a local change might not be enough.  I'm continuing to search for other infoboxes that use the line break in a Collapsible list title.
 * PPS. NOTE to TheDJ... My Print Screen doesn't work, and when I try to do a regular page print of the testcases page, the preview screen doesn't show the boxes collapsed. They automatically uncollapse, and there is no [ Hide ] link showing.  However, I assure you that, in the infobox on the left, the Constitutionally recognised languages list's [ Show ] link is almost halfway off the right edge of the infobox (in IE7 and IE8).

(out). After checking hundreds of articles and templates that link to either Collapsible list or to Infobox Country or both, I have been unable to find another instance of long-titled lists with line breaks. So at this point, I conclude that the overhang of the [ Show ]/[ Hide ] link in Template:Collapsible list has been repaired. I'll continue to look for this as a normal course of editing and, if I find another instance of the [ Show ]/[ Hide ] link extending past the edge of an infobox, I will pursue a local solution. Thank you, everyone, very much for your help with this template repair! &mdash;  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.   08:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But the template is not fixed. If anything, it is worse than originally because now every page looks bad in Firefox, long title or not. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Did a reduction of four degrees in the width cause that much damage? Can you be more explicit, please?
 * &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   18:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

(out). This is Paine again, and here is where we are at present: I converted the LEFT infobox on the testcases page to the Collapsible list/sandbox, in which the width parameter has been increased back to 100%. So now a direct comparison can be made between the Collapsible list sandbox version (width=100%) and the live version (width=96%). Internet Explorer users will note that in the LEFT infobox, ALL THREE lists, the Official languages, Constitutionally recognised languages and the Non-numbered Footnotes lists have [ Show ] links that hang over outside the right edge of the infobox. As might be expected, the [ Show ] link in the #2 list, Constitutionally recognised languages, hangs outside farther than the others because of the  (line break) in that title.

And there's more... I just downloaded the FireFox web browser so I could see for myself what the difference is between the 100% width on the left (sandbox) and 96% width on the right (live version). It is true that the infobox on the LEFT, while it looks lousy and unprofessional in IE8, looks just fine in FireFox 3.5.5. However, it is also true that the infobox on the RIGHT also looks just fine in FireFox, and it looks okay in IE8, too. So I do not see what editor MrKIA11 says about the template not being fixed and that, "If anything, it is worse than originally because now every page looks bad in Firefox, long title or not." Sorry, I just don't see it. So perhaps what we need here to resolve this is to have other editors who have FireFox to look at the testcases page and let us know how both of the infoboxes' collapsible lists look to them. If anybody sports a Safari or a Chrome browser, please chime in with your observations, too. Thank you very much! &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   21:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that the current sandbox is OK, but I don't think leaving the way it is now is OK either. The sandbox page is not a good example, as the overall width is so small that the difference is pixels, but when the overall width is the whole page, 4% can be almost an inch. The problem really lies in the compatibility of collapsible lists and infoboxes, as there are no problems when the list is not contained. I'm no expert with templates, but I think the problem can be found and fixed. MrKIA11 (talk) 21:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, MrKIA11! Now that you've explained it, I can create the scene you describe.  Please look at my personal sandbox, where I've taken the Non-numbered references list from the India Infobox Country template and increased its width to page-wide.  When I view this page in IE8 (the "Chick" skin appears to be the worst case, but the commonly used "Monobook" isn't significantly different), the 4% width change has caused the [ Show ] link to move about 1/4 inch to the left, however when I look at it in FireFox, the difference is more like 1/2 inch.  So now I can see that you've made two excellent points...
 * The change in width does become significant in FireFox when the list is a whole page wide, and
 * There does seem to be a compatibility issue between this template, Collapsible lists, and all the many infobox templates.
 * In the case of number one above, I looked at over a hundred templates yesterday, and they were all less than 1/3 of a page wide. Most were less than 1/4 page wide.  There were none that were a whole page wide, but of course, this doesn't mean that there are no templates that are a whole page wide.  As for number two above, I don't have a clue how to go about fixing that, so a Collapsible list template expert is needed there.
 * It looks like you are right – it does boil down to the need for a consensus. May we please have the observations and opinions of other editors on this?  MrKIA11, would you like to get an RFC started?
 * &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   00:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Let it be. My own opinion is still to leave this template as is, in other words, I think the edit that decreased the width from 100% to 96% should remain as is.  My reason is that to revert this edit would mean that a large number of templates would again look very unprofessional to all readers who use Internet Explorer to read Wikipedia.  And when I compare that to the way the templates appear in FireFox, in my opinion the present version is acceptable and looks professional.  Added note (16 Dec 2009):  According to statistics found at W3 Schools dot com, Internet Explorer users and Firefox users number 37.5% and 47.5%, respectively, of the total users who browse the Internet. IE still possesses a significant part of the market.
 * &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   00:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well if you want to get into numbers, then it is really only 24.7%, because IE8 is not affected, and even looks worse than Firefox, because the Show link is overlapping the text in most zoom levels. This website shows the comparison between the different versions of IE & Firefox. MrKIA11 (talk) 18:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Beg to differ, Mr. K! I presently use IE8 to edit Wikipedia, and the problems pertaining to this template were just as visible in IE8 as they were in my old IE7.  Perhaps you have found a way to change your browser settings so that they more closely match Firefox? and BTW, I also have Firefox, which I use to check to make sure my edits appear okay in that popular browser, as well.
 * &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   20:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually never use IE8, so I have not changed any settings. But apparently you are one of the few, if not only person affected in IE8, as neither I, RockMFR (who was the first to respond above), or the website that I linked to show a problem in IE8. But this may help solve the problem. If there is a way to compare your setting to everyone else, then maybe the problem can be found easier. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Please explain how you can draw such a conclusion, "if not the only one"? There is no evidence for that.  The administrator who altered the width saw a problem in IE7, and I presently see the same exact problem in IE8.  Also I tried to get editor RockMFR to give details about what was seen, but so far there has been no response.  Maybe RockMFR was not looking in the right place?  I have tried many different settings for my IE8, including "bare-bones" settings, and I still see the problem in the sandbox version on the testcases page, and this applies in all of the nine skins.  So I suggest we see if more editors won't add their observation to this discussion.  Again, feel free to start an RFC to get other opinions.
 * &mdash;  Paine's   Climax   23:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Overhang section break
So what do we do about this? The issue will unfortunately not fix itself. I'm not sure if there is a place to ask "IE" experts that could figure out why it is broken in IE7. MrKIA11 (talk) 21:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Is there anyone that is an expert on the inner-working of IE to determine why this problem occurs? Considering that less than 25% of people are effected, I still think we should change this back. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm tempted to revert the change based slightly on WP:BRD. And there doesn't seem to be any problem with that as no one has responded to me in almost 2 months. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going away for a week now, but if the issue is still outstanding, i'll see if i can look at it again. I've added the template to my watchlist, but don't be shy to poke for my attention next week. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

There should be no width specified at all. Every table cell has, which IE7 adds to   (or even  ) to create a width greater than 100% of the cell. 's are block elements, which take up all horizontal space by default, so a width should not be required for any other browser, either. Other than that, there's one other bug that might manifest, which would most simply be dealt with by adding  somewhere in   (likely benign to other browsers, but I haven't tested this against the horrific code Wikipedia currently has in place). ¦ Reisio (talk) 09:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Let it be. My opinion is still to leave this template just as it is. In other words, I think the edit that decreased the width from 100% to 96% should remain as is unless Reisio's idea above is viable (I'm not an expert and understand very little of what Reisio wrote).  My reason is that to revert this edit would mean that a large number of templates would again look very unprofessional to all readers who use Internet Explorer to read Wikipedia.  And when I compare that to the way the templates appear in FireFox, in my opinion the present version is acceptable and looks professional in both browsers.  Since IE still possesses a significant part of the market, and since this problem occurs in both IE7 and in IE8 (see testcases page), this edit is okay as is.
 * &mdash; Paine ( Ellsworth's   Climax )  10:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I wish Reisio had noticed this conversation before. I can't believe it was as simple as completely removing . I updated the sandbox, and the testcases page shows no problem. I'm waiting for new screenshots to be created, but as it seems the problem has been fixed, I will update the template to the sandbox version within the hour. If there still exists a problem, feel free to revert, but I think we hit the nail on the head. Thanks Reisio. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:37, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The testcases and at least one article, India, look good! Reisio!  Where HAVE you BEEN?
 * &mdash; Paine ( Ellsworth's   Climax )  11:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Small glitch
See Template_talk:Infobox_currency. I'm not sure whether the problem is with this template or the infobox. 86.150.102.21 (talk) 20:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC).

My talk page
Will some look at my user page? I am using this template to collapse my user boxes and it doesn't seem to work. The code is located on this subpage. BOVINEBOY 2008 ) 14:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me. What exactly do you think is wrong? MrKIA11 (talk) 15:39, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Every time I look at it, either on the subpage or on my page, it isn't collapsed. BOVINEBOY 2008 ) 15:41, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's collapsed for me in both Firefox and IE8, logged in or not. Have you tried purging the page? MrKIA11 (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It still won't work, I checked my preferences and they seem fine, maybe it is my monobook? BOVINEBOY 2008 ) 16:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried it the Monobook skin, but it was still fine. If you are talking about your Custom JS, I'm not an expert, but nothing looks like it would effect the collapsiblity of the lists. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I just won't worry about it. Thanks for the help though! BOVINEBOY 2008 ) 16:13, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Default position without javascript
There are many pages on enwiki which use multiple instances of this template without appreciating what the page looks like when javascript is turned off. This is a particular problem for Mobile Wikipedia where the javascript which drives this template is turned off for all users. Have a brief look at the mobile version of European Union and you'll see what I mean. In short I propose that when the template is set to hide by default, it should be hidden in css by default. I realise that readers who have javascript disabled won't be able to un-collapse collapsible lists but it is hardly a solution to have them un-collapsed all the time. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 15:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "No Method Error" is what I get:( But anyway, as an extension of the "hidden in css", could we have the [show] link then change that style setting? DMacks (talk) 15:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There appears to have been a problem with Mobile Wikipedia. It's fixed now. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 12:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Collapsible List with Multiple columns?
Is there a way to produce a collapsible list with multiple columns? Greg Comlish (talk) 05:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify whether you mean the whole list collapses vs each column separately collapsible, and whether you mean automatic multicolumn vs with explicit column-breaks in the page source? I'm not sure which (if any) of these are possible, but some seem easier and others harder, and it all seems dependent upon what scenario you envision. DMacks (talk) 07:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm envisioning one list that expands into several columns of text. I wouldn't mind predefining what goes into which column if that is necessary, but if it's easier to have it do automatic multicolumn then that would as be acceptable.  Greg Comlish (talk) 17:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Does the following work? Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

My list with Template:col-begin, Template:col-break, Template:col-end


 * Item 1
 * Item 2

My list with Template:div col, Template:div col end
 * Item 3
 * Item 4


 * Item 1
 * Item 2
 * Item 3
 * Item 4
 * Note the second does not work in all browsers. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 17:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

List semantics, and an unneeded fork
I'd always assumed that this template produced an HTML list. However, after seeing it forked to collapsible bulletlist the other week, it appears that this template simply hacks the appearance of a list by using line breaks. Merging collapsible bulletlist here would be trivial if this template used a styled  (or indeed   as an option) rather than hacking up a list with divs and line breaks and would be both a semantic and accessibility win. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 22:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That's got to be the way forward. Anything which emulates a list without actually using list markup is to be avoided. Note also Unbulleted list. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree collapsible list could do the functionality of collapsible bulletlist. I'm not sure if it's better as its own or not. There's good arguments to be made for both single-use templates and for larger multi-use ones. The vast number of collapsible list's transclusions makes it a bit more difficult to modify and innovate as it's hard to predict what it may break. The test cases shows off only one type of use; I assume there's more use cases. For the bullet list, I'm looking to implement a few things. (1) the ability to have nested collapsible bullet lists. (2) the ability to easily merge into an existing list of any depth. (3) a fix for the overlapping of the list title & the "show/hide" text when the box is too small for the text. I haven't looked into 1 so far, but 2 & 3 are mostly fixed. For 2, it works currently only for a depth of one but not above. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 08:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

If combined, for the method, using the CSS  might be best; alignment may not be correct though. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 08:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I doubt whether (1) and (2) can be made to work with proper semantic HTML markup, because you'll be marking up items as sub-lists in order to hide the, when the items are really still part of the top-level list. Conversely, "and more" is not an item in the list. Please don't abuse HTML in that way. Not only is it bad practice semantically (it may help you to visualise the problem if you use  instead of  ) and for accessibility; but it may also have unintended consequences elsewhere. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed about the "and more..." those are rather convoluted uses of it. You can see it in action (pre-template form) 2011 Wisconsin protests and (template form) 2011 Libyan uprising.  The uses are in the infobox.  I have a few working solutions to (2), the leading is encase the collapsible bulletlist within   element which pushes it out to the right indentation so it aligns properly. Although this does have the effect of creating a second bullet list that simply looks like a single one.  I'm not sure that's a problem though.   ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 11:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Could we just get the code currently in use converted first before inventing new use cases and asking for features? The current sandbox code looks okay to me on the one test case provided. Can someone sanity-check it? By default it has no bullets; bullets will be displayed by passing. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The spacing of the sandbox is larger than the live version. I'd recommend setting   for the  and    for the  . With those additions, the spacing is the same between the live and sandbox. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good, modulo some margin tweaks. I would say it's basically ready to go. By the way, I have noticed that many articles calling this are adding bullets using &amp;bull;, so it is useful to have an option to turn on the bullets as well. Thanks for taking the time to do this! Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  19:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Want to have a shot at fixing the margins in the sandbox? I added Justin's tweaks but we've still got some extra spacing. Once the testcases are a good enough match I'll deploy it. In the long run I want rid of the divs; it should be possible to do the whole thing with nested lists, though we'll need some changes to the site JS to make it work. Who's the best person to ask about that? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 15:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I have everything lined up in the sandbox. In firefox & chrome, it's pixel perfect between for the test cases, and untested in other browsers, but assumed to be correct.  Bullets are rather untested, perhaps some more tests cases for that.  The normal list looks good to ship though. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * So it's actually off by two pixels only in the very bottom of the first testcase. One of those pixels is due to the reference being [14] instead of [10], the other pixel, I'd just ignore. The only css difference I see is a computed   vs.  .  ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 20:54, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me as well. I will go ahead and copy the sandbox code over to the live template.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  22:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Excellent. Cheers guys. Now we can move onto improvements and new features. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 22:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI, I had to make this change, after our changes broke that template. Basically, it appears to have broken some cases when you pass a wikitable as input.  Hopefully this was an isolated case.  If not, we may want a special case when there is only one input.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  03:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Also if you're passing a bullet list *item1\n *item2\n *item3, it fails for the first element of the list. I added an example to the testcases page, it's the one w/ the dice picture. I've also added a few other testcases for better coverage. As for making a special case for just one input, they could be passing in four wikitables instead of just one. I think we'd need a more general solution. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 05:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had to make this change as well, which was exactly the issue you noticed. So far, the only real problems that I have seen are cases where this template is being used with only one item, and hence isn't really being used to generate a list.  Could we fix this by checking to see if, , ... are all empty, and if so, we don't use &lt;ul&gt; and &lt;li&gt;?  Or, we need to add a newline before the (first) item.  Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  06:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think if we added a newline before the first element, it would cause spacing issues. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Found another failure case. Embedded bare  fails. Example:. Previously, it produced a bulleted list, now it produces a bare list. Not sure if this is widely used, and it fails gracefully. I added another testcase for it. I also temporarily put the old Collapsible list template into the sandbox so we can see the differences. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps we should just identify all the cases where people are just using the collapsible-list as a simple way to create a collapsible box. I'd recommend putting in. Then create a new template which specifically does that well (like the old version). Then check the category and identify the templates/pages responsible and change them over to that simple-collapsible-box template. And yes, this is exactly how my forks get created :)  Justin Ormont (talk) 07:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Could we differentiate between "failure", as in actually breaking pages, and "behaviour changes", where something simply looks different? Perfect backwards compatibility does not need to be a goal here as the purpose is to improve the semantic value of such lists. If existing uses are manually including their own bullet points or table markup then they're doing it wrong and are likely impossible to navigate sensibly by keyboard or screen reader already. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The two that I mentioned (Infobox medal templates, and Sidebar with collapsible lists) were actual failures. In the first one, it was completely broken after the change.  In the second one, it was failing to render the first bullet in inputs in the form '* item 1\n* item2\n* item 3'.  For medal templates, I simply substituted the old simplified version of this template into that template.  It was just using this template to create a collapsible table, and hence not creating a list, and wasn't using more than .  In the second case, I copied a simplified version of this template into a subtemplate.  It too wasn't using this template to create lists, but simply passing lists to it, so it didn't need more than .  Perhaps it would be a good idea to have, which would be this template, but without the list part.  It would only have one input for the body of the div.  This template could use that template to create the outer div container, and just concentrate on creating the inner list portion.  This new template could then be used in applications which are only using  and are generating their own lists, or passing tables, or whatever.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  01:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, what brought this discussion about was my desire to try to do something about the degree to which list content is faked or created using excessive table hacks right now, as demonstrated by the examples on Template:Infobox civil conflict/testcases. It'd certainly be a good idea to decide when a simple collapsing div would be better, but if we create such a thing too early the danger is that collapsible list will simply be abandoned en masse even for content where it's the best solution. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 09:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Also of note: br separated entries. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 15:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I created that template for the sole purpose of putting line breaks between "birth_name", "birth_date", and "birth_place". If you check the talk page, I never intended it to be used for lists, which is why the name is not "br list", and it only allows for three inputs. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  01:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The update broke a wikitable I put inside the template for my welcome message. Any workaround? / ƒETCH COMMS  /  21:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed the "1 =", but even better would be to switch over to using hidden or hidden begin since it's not a list, and this template will add some list markup. I will demonstrate in a second.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  21:59, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way to get the lists to indent without a bullet? Previously, preceeding the first item with a colon indented the entire list—see WikiProject Video games/Deletion/Archivesbox. —Ost (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Try this. Frietjes (talk) 19:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good and you even edited it for me. Thanks! —Ost (talk) 22:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Scalability
Vipera berus has a collapsible list with 75 items, and this template only supports 50. Is there something like for wrapping an existing list? Or is the prefered method to just use hidden begin? Frietjes (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I would say that hidden begin/hidden end is your best choice for such situations. It's essentially equivalent to just using the top and bottom parts of this template, as far as I can tell.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  18:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

As part of a bullet list hierarchy
I am seeking a solution for a collapsible bullet list which is subordinate to a non-collapsible bullet hierarchy. The template Collapsible bulletlist is close, but not quite doing what is expected. I don't know if that's because I'm not using it right or it can't be done. A complete explanation and example is at Template talk:Collapsible bulletlist. —EncMstr (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Bold title
Is it possible to avoid the bold list title, as in have a normal font style?  McLerristarr &#124;  Mclay1  15:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Try . Frietjes (talk) 22:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I tried so many things but I didn't realise there was a separate "font-weight" thing.  McLerristarr &#124;  Mclay1  12:30, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

"titlestyle=font-weight:normal" doesn't really solve the problem. This is what comes out of it:

Title

One

Two

Three I'd appreciate if you could help me figuring out how to make the title box white. -- Ե րևանցի talk  19:22, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * to make it white, append background:transparent (or background:white). I updated your example. Frietjes (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * this ping won't work, as you didn't include a signature in that edit. this should notify you. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 20:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you guys! -- Ե րևանցի talk  21:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * {{collapsible list


 * titlestyle=font-weight:normal;background:transparent; worked for me. Thanks a lot! --AlbertJB (talk) 15:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Trying to adopt this to a Wikia based Wiki
Hi I'm trying to adopt this template for use on a Wikia based wiki and cant get it to work is there any JavaScript needed to make it work. I believe the issues that I'm having may be caused by the lack of the correct JavaScript. Any help would be great.-- Dch eagle  21:23, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Borked?
Responding to a help desk question. The examples in the documentation looked fine until I purged the doc page, now they are borked:

Thoughts? ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 10:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be fixed, in any case. —$Kerfuffler stalk harass$ 15:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This was due to 40306. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 16:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah. Forgot HTML5 was to be enabled. Thanks. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 16:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Some styling to be moved?
Hello. Does anyone else agree that the stylings currently at the ends of the NavFrame, NavHead and NavContent tags should precede (respectively) the, and  in each tag, otherwise they can override these parameters rather than provide default settings..? CsDix (talk) 01:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. How can we petition for this to happen? –aʙᴊıᴋʟaᴍ&#91;ᴛ|ᴄ&#93; 15:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry not to reply more promptly. Making an Edit protected request might be worth a try..? CsDix (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

mw-collapsible
Can anybody rewrite it according to mw:Manual:Collapsible elements? --DixonD (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Prepped this in Template:Collapsible_list/sandbox. Open for review —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 14:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

variable values
Where can i find possible options for the variables: framestyle, titlestyle nad liststyle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.97.2.35 (talk) 08:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Formatting
Hello,

I'm trying to get the heading on the title of the collapsible list to be the same as in normal text; unfortunately, the "font-weight:normal" code doesn't seem to work and the text remains bold and a blue background appears. Any suggestions? Brigade Piron (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Use jquery.makeCollapsible?
Can this be migrated to the ResourceLoader/Default modules? Helder 19:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

titlestyle
If titlestyle and framestyle aren't used, the default styling is: Testing, testing

1

2

3 i.e. the title is left-aligned, with no background added, while the entire title+list isn't surrounded by a border.

As soon as titlestyle and/or framestyle are used, however – say, to specify a width and add some padding – this happens: Testing, testing

1

2

3 i.e. the title is centrered on a background, while the title+list is surrounded by a border.

Are these behaviouors intentional? (If so, for any particular reason?) (As it's framestyle rather than bodystyle or just style etc, perhaps the border is to be expected – but titlestyle's behaviouor does seem odd.)

Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

does: ... expand
When I set no, the table expands. That is a bug. I propose to change the behaviour into confirmed-only (for example by yesno). -DePiep (talk) 23:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * By design. Any value triggers 'true'. Simply omit the parameters to collapse.  18:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's the point: that is not "simply", it is counter-intuitive. It is half-code (the programmer expects me to take half their chair). -DePiep (talk) 19:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This code style makes this template unusable in subtemplates (IOW: one can not even pass-through parameter value settings vs value usage). What an amateur attitude, coming down from mw. I had hoped this would recede with Lua. -DePiep (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * And no I won't use the hack you're about to tell me. -DePiep (talk) 20:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what hack I'm about to tell you... Suffice to say, the parameter is presence-based, not value-based. That means you have to test and pass using, which is quite common for boolean parameters.   20:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's the hack I expected. I wont use it, we're not mw-coding level here. As you say too: valueed params. To cut thing short: why not change and allow no for predictable input? -DePiep (talk) 20:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That just moves the problem fron one template to another, doesn't it?  05:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Add  after line 96, update the documentation and check that no transclusions use "on" or any other synonym for true except "t", "yes", "y" and "1". HTH. Alakzi (talk) 13:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * re EDokter Which problem is moved? To be clear: I propose to change this 'by design', as described. (might be moot after Alakzi post). -DePiep (talk) 13:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * re Alakzi: might be better to only add a check for "no/n/0" + that behaviour change. All others (param value blank, any other value including "yes/true") should keep old behaviour (=default: uncollapsed) . This would need no checking, assuming/understanding that any editor entering no intended to have it uncollapsed. -DePiep (talk) 13:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The default is collapsed. Alakzi (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Confusion only. expand is uncollapsed (defaulting param value). -DePiep (talk) 13:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * * "no" value could be list of confirmed negatives: no, n, 0, false.

-DePiep (talk) 13:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC) No, expand has no effect: Alakzi (talk) 14:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right. My main point stays. -DePiep (talk) 14:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * So fix it. :-) Alakzi (talk) 15:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * ? -DePiep (talk) 15:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Change the module to do what you want it to. Alakzi (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah. Well, as I read it EDokter wrote opposition, no intention to change the "by design" thing. -DePiep (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with someone else adding it, as long as it doesn't change the default behaviour.  16:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * consensus then: no will show (uncollapse) the list. I may need more time to test & implement this; if anyone else takes action that's OK with me. Also, it's up to the implementor to choose wrt input like uc, "false", and "N". ping . -DePiep (talk) 20:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

style per listitem?
Is it possible to add like itemstyle that set the style for each element? -DePiep (talk) 16:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The line spacing of vgrelease is larger than list-item spacing for collapsible list, so if several instances of the former are used to list multiple releases such as for different platforms, the result is really ugly. At Nights into Dreams I just added half an em of  to each item make it less ugly, and the way I had to do it was with a div wrapper on every item. This shouldn't be necessary - unordered list for example has   for this purpose. I was pretty annoyed to find this template doesn't have this feature too. Hairy Dude (talk) 02:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Why font-size set?
Module:Collapsible list module code sets this: 'font-size: 105%;' eg for NavHead and NavContent. Is there an explanation? As I read it now, it alters the style unsollicited. -DePiep (talk) 11:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't know... Perhaps because it is used mainly in infoboxes?  11:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My guess too: to undo some inherited 95% setting from somewhere. Could be by a class too if I understand this correct. Found a way out. -DePiep (talk) 12:03, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Collapsing multiple objects simultaneously that are in different places of the page/article.
Is it possible to have a "show" button that will un-collapse, for instance, bundled images that are in different places on an article (in a table, specifically)? My specific issue is that my structure images in my tables spread out the table quite a bit, and if there were a single point at which they could all get bundled, so the table's values could be referenced more easily, it'd be a wonder. (EDIT: let me know if I am explaining myself clearly on what it is I suggest, and whether or not it can be utilized with the extant template wiki-codes in current use or if the idea is viable in a new template of some kind) Nagelfar (talk) 22:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If this doesn't exist, where would be the place to request the implementation of such a function for WP? Nagelfar (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Mobile
Is there any particular reason why this is un-collapsed by default on mobile? Can it be fixed? I gather it has something to do with the mobile site using an entirely different set of JavaScript scripts which doesn't include support for this. Hairy Dude (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, mobile doesn't support these scripts, because most pages don't need them and mobile needs to be lean and mean. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 18:19, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

List name overlaps with [show] / [hide] button in infobox
As shown in the first infobox, when using as an infobox data item with a long label, the list name overlaps with the [show] / [hide] button. I was going to contrast that with the behavior of Hidden, but apparently using that in the same infobox fixes the problem, so I've shown that in a separate infobox. Languorrises (talk) 00:54, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Just realized that mentioned this in the List semantics, and an unneeded fork section above, but it doesn't seem it was ever fixed. Languorrises (talk) 01:05, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This should now be fixed. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 06:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is, as my example just below this section still displays "squishing". As does the example in this section. I'm on current Chrome on a Mac, if that helps. —Joeyconnick (talk) 07:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had to revert because I ran into some problems I had not anticipated. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 11:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Unbolded title
Is it possible to use an unbolded title? ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 21:20, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Dissident93: easiest way would be to use nobold, i.e.


 * titlestyle is an alternative. However, next to font-weight:normal; you'll also have to set background:transparent; text-align:left;—it works just as well, but it's a little excessive. Jay D. Easy&#8202;(t&#8202;•&#8202;c) 17:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 23:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 21 May 2020
Hi can someone give me access to the full code? I try to import the template into swwiki. Otherwise I am also happy if anybody who knows this better than me can do it for me. Kipala (talk) 10:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC) Kipala (talk) 10:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if you don't have template editor rights, you should still be able to access the source code of a page by clicking the "View source" link. In this case, the entire source code of collapsible list is :


 * What's probably confusing you is that this wikitext depends wholly on Module:Collapsible list. The source code of Module:Collapsible list is too long to post in a comment, but you can read it [ by clicking "View source" on that page]. If you are trying to copy this page to another wiki, you need to copy both the template and the module to that wiki. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...  13:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

The template works for mobile version in Chinese Wiki
How did the template in ZH Wiki actually work on mobile while EN Wiki didn't? https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Collapsible_list I wanted to extract the codes from ZH Wiki but couldn't find the difference from both template and module page in EN Wiki. Thank you. Pichnat Thong (talk) 19:33, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


 * It depends on site JavaScript. On zhwiki there’s a gadget called “NavFrame” (zh:MediaWiki:Gadget-NavFrame.js, zh:MediaWiki:Gadget-NavFrame.css), which is set to load on mobile as well. On enwiki, this code is in MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, which aren’t loaded on mobile (and this cannot be changed). You can ask interface administrators on WP:IAN to turn the enwiki code into a gadget and set it to load on mobile. (I’m not sure if it’s a good idea, though: these toggles are quite small and thus hard to press on a touchscreen.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:58, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

It wouldn't be hard for browsers with latest update these days. You won't have to click on exact place as it spanned over the bar. I would ask them for this. Pichnat Thong (talk) 02:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

titlestyle again
I have the same question as did four years ago in : why is it when I set the titlestyle, the title is suddenly set to be centered and on a purple background? Or rather, I guess, why is it that the titles for collapsible lists are automatically set to be on transparent backgrounds with left-aligned text unless one tries to apply a style to the title, in which case the title's background and text alignment defaults to whatever Wikipedia default has a purple background with centred text?

Sample list, no titlestyle

1

2

3

Sample list, titlestyle set to font-weight: normal

1

2

3

When a user sets a title style parameter that has nothing to do with the background or text alignment, no reasonable user would expect the background or the text's alignment to change because style is usually inherited unless specifically overridden. Collapsible list sets up the expectation that the default style for the title of a collapsible list is left-aligned on a transparent background but then throws out that default when you actually go to tweak the style of the title.

The LUA responsible is here: local div2style = formatAttributes(       'style',        'font-size: 105%;',        args.title_style,        args.titlestyle,        not ( args.title_style or args.titlestyle ) and 'background: transparent; text-align: left;'    )

As near as I can tell, it should actually be: local div2style = formatAttributes(       'style',        'font-size: 105%; background: transparent; text-align: left;',        args.title_style,        args.titlestyle    )

What do people think about fixing this? Or is there some deep, hidden but important reason it was set up this way in the first place? —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:47, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * no problem with fixing this, but we would first need some scope about how many people are relying on that behavior. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 06:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay... how would that be generated/determined? Some kind of query for when Collapsible list has a titlestyle set that doesn't include both "background: transparent;" and "text-align: left;"? I wouldn't really know where to begin if that's what would be or similar to what would be required. —Joeyconnick (talk) 07:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We wait for a month or so and then this link will tell us. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 20:50, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * so that doesn't seems to have helped because for titlestyle, it's listing &gt; 50 unique values on 2961 pages. Can we drill down? I guess we now know an upper limit for the number of pages any change will impact. —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:40, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * working on it, I added Category:Pages using collapsible list with titlestyle to get started, we can add more logic to sort by value after the category fills up and we have a good set of examples. Frietjes (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I did some quick and dirty searches:
 * There are 3037 instances of the template using titlestyle
 * There are 1406 using "background: transparent" followed by "text-align: left"
 * There are 374 using "text-align: left" followed by "background: transparent"
 * So I think that means there are roughly 3037 − 1406 − 374 = 1257 pages where changing the default would have an impact. —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:07, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Joeyconnick, I split the tracking category into 2 subcategories (with both background/text-align and without). the without subcategory should be the list of pages which will be impacted by changing the default (as soon as it finishes filling up).  Frietjes (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Joeyconnick and TheDJ: I think the tracking categories are close to being filled now and it looks like there aren't that many pages in Category:Pages using collapsible list without both background and text-align in titlestyle compared to Category:Pages using collapsible list with both background and text-align in titlestyle. I think we can fix/update the ca. 150 articles in Category:Pages using collapsible list without both background and text-align in titlestyle and then change the default to append the value of titlestyle rather than overwrite. Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks... this is really promising and your coding help has been invaluable! ~150 could be fixed by hand if necessary, even. 🙂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:20, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Joeyconnick, I updated the syntax for most of them. assuming my edits aren't reverted, we can probably go ahead with the change soon. Frietjes (talk) 13:27, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * P.S. this change still needs to happen as well.. I think it is good to go and the longer it is delayed, the more pages will start showing up in Category:Pages using collapsible list without both background and text-align in titlestyle  that will need to be cleaned up again. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi all... I have emptied Category:Pages using collapsible list without both background and text-align in titlestyle as best I can (can't seem to find where it's called at COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan but oh well). Could someone make this change? I don't have template editor rights or I'd do it myself. Paging  or really anyone with templateeditor! —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Joeyconnick, now implemented. the COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan page just needed to be purged.  should I remove the tracking now? Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * That's weird... I thought I purged it, but anyway, amazing! Thank you! I'm wondering if we need to do the same process for liststyle? See  – is this related? (pinging ) —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

show/hide alignment option?
I just noticed the use of this template for the indigenous parameter of the infobox in the Languages of the United States article. Actually, I didn't notice it at first because its unexpected alignment there caused me to miss seeing the show/hide toggle. Can the show/hide toggle be optionally positioned left-justified instead of right? If not, could it be?

A similar question was asked previously at, above. I'm guessing that this might need changes at MediaWiki:Common.css, but I'm hoping not. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Having the same problem with this template. Is there a way to place the show/hide link on the left, without altering Common.css? Thanks! Sal9000 (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Right, it appears that is set by either MediaWiki:Common.js or MediaWiki:Common.css. Try asking at WP:VPT.  Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  18:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I did some checking, and I am wrong. This is possible with templates like hidden top/hidden bottom,


 * Item 1
 * Item 2
 * Item 3


 * Perhaps we should add this feature to this template? Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  18:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)