Template talk:RelationDescription
blank space / overlapping with tables
Apparently, you need to add a
<br clear="all"/>
after summaries, as in Relation:restriction. That makes the articles themselves hard to read. Is there some way around this? Robx 11:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Other Languages
Why not inherit Template:Languages instead of rewriting part of the template inside this template? --Skippern 14:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Would that be as simple as replacing the "Other languages" table with {{Languages|Relation:{{{type}}}}}? --EdLoach 14:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Answering self, yes it was when I remembered the colon. --EdLoach 14:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Infobox
"This page describes a relation. It should outline the community consensus upon how complicated RelationDescription should be mapped using relations. Related proposals should be listed Here and in Talk."
What's that info box for? It seems to add unnecessary clutter to relation pages. The links behind "here" and "talk" are even incorrect - discussion should take place on the talk page, not */Talk, proposals should be placed on Proposed Features. None of that information is specific to relations, though, and "this page describes a relation" isn't really helpful either, imo. --Tordanik 06:41, 25 October 2010 (BST)
- I've removed the box. --Tordanik 15:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Status argument
I would like to add a status argument indicating the proposal / approval / usage status, similar to the Template:ValueDescription template - does anyone oppose this? MHohmann (talk) 08:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
The status draft is not supported
I tried to use the status draft, but it doesn't seem to be supported, despite being listed in the docs of this template and also on the list of statuses. I noted this also on the talk page there