Template talk:POV statement

Style
I think it is a bit too small and the brackets are too close to the text -- Snailwalker | talk 13:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * If you look at my original version, in the history, you may wish to adapt it. Computerjoe 's talk 19:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah I like that one better, but it would be nice to have someone else comment on this -- Snailwalker | talk 19:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It was edited by User:HereToHelp as it was too lengthy. Perhaps a change to 'neutrality disputed. see talk.'? Computerjoe 's talk 20:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Bracket spacing can be adjusted with  (thin space). For example, [&#8201;neutrality disputed&#8201;]. Thin spaces are sometimes used around em dashes. I don't know how compatible they are across browsers. Experiment and see.&#8201;—&#8201;mjb 22:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * They're not supported by all browsers and display inconsistently across those that do recognise them. &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 05:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk Page
Since this is of line-item use, maybe it should take a parameter to point to a talk page section, rather than just pointing to the whole talk page?

I know it's hard to maintain the section links, if the sections of the talk page change, but I'd think if someone was taking the time to archive a talk page, that these would either be gone, replaced by a page dispute/pov, or be archived along with it.

If my suggestion comes to fruition, here is some language for the usage section:

&mdash; &lt; T A L K JNDRLINE T A L K &gt;

Wikiproject Inline templates proposed
WikiProject Council/Proposals. I've been meaning to do this for a while. &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 16:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Category
Any objection changing the category here to Category:Articles with minor POV problems like the other inline neutrality templates?-- Birgitte SB  17:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Linebreak.
Still causing linebreaks and therefor spaced boxes after template:. -- Jeandré, 2008-12-19t13:52z