Template talk:Confusion matrix terms

Template width
The extreme width of this large-print-edition template is really overpowering articles it's transcluded into, eating up more than half the available content width at typical browser sizes. I've created a sandbox version that uses the math  environment to try and wrap some of the wider examples down to narrower multi-line vertical layouts. It really helps reduce the width, though some editors will likely take issue with some or all of the changes. (I predict the MCC equation is the most likely to prove objectionable.)

If any topic editors could look it over and consider incorporating at least some of the wrapping changes, so that the overall template width can shrink down to a slightly more reasonable size, I think it would benefit the readers of all seven articles currently employing this template. Any errors or misrepresentations in the current sandbox are entirely my fault, and I'll be happy to fix anything pointed out to me. Or, of course, feel free to be BOLD. (Please ping me in any replies, thanks.) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I should further point out, not that it's directly the fault of this template, the layout disasters that can result when someone decides to stick an image next to the super-wide box, like at the top of Receiver operating characteristic. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Agree that this template is overpowering, having encountered it as something I had to scroll through before reading the first line of an article. What purpose is this template actually serving, outside of the confusion matrix article itself - is it just a crib sheet for articles that include a confusion matrix? --Lord Belbury (talk) 09:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Wow, I completely forgot about this! My proposed/sandboxed changes aside, I agree it's probably worthwhile to question whether this template needs to exist at all, or needs to exist in its current form. So much of it is redundant with Template:Diagnostic testing diagram, as well.
 * Related question: Even if the template is useful, does it really make sense (given its content) as an infobox? Especially when its contents don't actually fit inside an infobox (which was really my original point in all of this, even if not directly articulated that way). FeRDNYC (talk) 14:58, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * (Pinging; not sure why I thought that was automatic, with the new reply feature.) FeRDNYC (talk) 15:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm out of my zone with stats and really don't understand what purposes the template is meant to be serving. If it is intended as a crib sheet, the same kind of thing you could put on a trigonometry or logic gate article, reminding the reader at some length about sin/cos/tan or and/or/not, Wikipedia seems to do that through in-text hyperlinks or a seemain template rather than a sidebar box, if it even does it at all. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:27, 12 July 2022 (UTC)