Template talk:Sqrt

Why not use this template
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive 14 Jɪmp 02:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's an alternative.


 * Enter your number here.


 * J IM ptalk·cont 01:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Bad, bad, bad. Never abuse scriptstyle outside of sub/pscripts like this, it brings in a load of typographic problems.—Emil J. 11:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean. Which looks better, $$\scriptstyle\sqrt{2}$$ or √ 2 ? J IM ptalk·cont 04:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The use of \scriptstyle may sometimes cause problems with spacing/fontsizes. For example: $$\scriptstyle\sqrt{2+2}=2$$ (compare to without scriptstyle: $$\sqrt{2+2}=2$$, the plus and equal sign are spaced). Of course spacing can be adjusted manually, but the advantage of √2 + 2 = 2 is that it reduced the loading time of the page, which becomes important for slower internet connections; and also scales better with different font sizes.  //  st pasha  »  08:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Is there any way to get the √ and the to link up? J IM ptalk·cont 10:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Now what would really be nice
... would be a template which gave you the square root of a number. Note: The Wiki software doesn't support the operator ^ thus  won't work. Pretty damn hopeless but that's the way it is. Jɪmp 02:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, both wishes have come true: sqrt (where this once was) gives the square root of a number & the Wiki software now does it too. J IM ptalk·cont 01:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Still in use?
Does anybody even use this template? I'd rather it was replaced by  producing √ n

The above comment is from Stpasha at 19:18, 3 November 2010.


 * √ n vs √ n


 * √ 2 vs √ 2


 * √ 12 vs √ 12


 * √ 276 vs √ 276


 * √ 2 vs √ 2


 * √ $1/undefined$ vs √ $1/undefined$


 * √ $$ vs √ $$


 * √ numb vs √ numb

It is better. J IM ptalk·cont 11:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

... mostly better ... the template's used on one article and on one talk page. J IM ptalk·cont 11:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

what does &radic; doing in top
Delete this extraneous heading which may confuse users. unsigned comment by‎ 117.198.16.148 at 5:14 am GMT on 7 April 2013


 * Done (not actually a heading but, anyway it's gone). J IM ptalk·cont 08:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Undone. Others like to see the raw output of a template. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 09:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Who? J IM ptalk·cont 09:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Me, for one. And there a good reason why: previewing live templates is impossible when they are hidden. It's OK when there is a sandbox, but a sandbox is not helpfull for templates this small. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 21:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, you for one, obviously, but you promised "others". I'm not sure what's wrong here: we've got an example of what the thing does in the documentation, how is this inadequate? J IM ptalk·cont 11:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Showing the result of the template is the standard and expected behaviour for other templates, as well as Mediawiki default without further code trickery. I see no reason why this template should be treated differently.—Emil J. 14:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Me too. Although preview consideration are now not so important as a year ago, anyway I detest templates which do not show even the simple test case, under the ordinary preview. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Template: Conjugate created as an alternative to buggy &#123;{overline}}
I announced it at WP: Village pump (technical) ‎, but no reaction ensued. I am not sure that it is much prettier than overline, but apparently it is not worse. If nobody objects, then I would port this style to sqrt and radic to make feasible their use under math, &#123;{sfrac}}, interval templates, and other similar ones. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops… why did I not notice a reply? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)