Talk:Internet Explorer box model bug: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:04, 15 November 2017

Latest revision as of 19:37, 3 February 2024

(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{talkheader}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject Microsoft Windows|class=B|importance=low|computing-importance=low}}

}}

==Fails To Mention Height==

Line 356 ⟶ 358:

===Discussion===

:''Any additional comments:''

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:pollbottom -->

== Support for Internet Explorer's box model ==

Line 381 ⟶ 383:

I don't have the time at the moment to read and appraise each of those references, but if they turn out to be blogs as I suspect, then I'm afraid they'll have to go. As I'm sure you know, WP does not generally regard personal blogs as [[WP:RELIABLE]] sources. If I get a chance, I'd like to go though and upgrade the whole article to the current recommended format for [[WP:CITE]] citations too - you know, using the format <nowiki><ref>{{cite web | url=... | title=... | author=... etc}}</ref></nowiki> rather than the current mish-mash. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 20:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

:{{done}} I updated many references. but the article needs more work anyway! [[User talk:Mabdul|<smallb style="font-family:bold 12px Courier New; display:inline; border:#009 1px dashed; padding:1px 6px 2px 7px; white-space:nowrap"><font; color=":#000">[[User000000; talkfont-size:Mabdul|smaller;">mabdul]]</font></smallb>]] 10:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

==Requested move==

Line 398 ⟶ 400:

*'''Support''' nominator. --[[User:Voidvector|Voidvector]] ([[User talk:Voidvector|talk]]) 21:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

*'''Oppose'''; the assertion that this is a 'problem' that isn't limited to Internet Explorer needs to be put forth by a number of reliable sources. It's also called the "Internet Explorer box model" or the "traditional box model" by most experts. There's no justification for removing this name from the title of the article. If anything, the name of the article should simply be "Internet Explorer box model" -- the notion that it's a bug by no means a universal one. <b><span style="color:#1018ff;font-family:Zapfino,Monotype Corsiva;"> [[User:Warren|Warren]]</span> [[User talk:Warren|-talk-]]</b> 22:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

*'''Support''' I will add the Netscape 4 boxmodel described in an article(link is somewhere above).(edit:oh and update the picture of course!)--<small style="font:bold 12px Courier New;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap">[[User:Mabdul|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#000;">mabdul</fontspan>]] [[User talk:Mabdul|0=*]]</small> 18:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

*'''Oppose''' The article is supported by numerous citations to published and peer-reviewed university- and professional-level textbooks (as well as to out of date and current W3C recommendations and some private web sites) that refer to this bug and use the terminology in the current title. This terminology is what this article explains. It is clear from the proposal that the move would be to a newly-coined phrase, which some authors feel would provide them with a wider scope to write their own essays, and expound their own synthesis of wide-ranging and currently disparate ideas. Therefore, this article is based on material that can be verified in primary, secondary and tertiary sources. The proposal seems designed to open its door to [[WP:OR#Synthesis_of_published_material_which_advances_a_position| original research and synthesis]]. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 20:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' The current article fails miserable in explaining the problem. It attempts to explain a structured problem, (i.e. "what is definition of 'width' and 'height' in terms of content/padding/border/margin?") by blaming it on the non-compliance of IE, and calling it a [[software bug]]. Also you are [[Wikipedia:Assume bad faith|assuming bad faith]] by thinking that any new contribution or expansion of the article will be "original research". In addition, the current article title is a wiki coined term as none of the citations calling it a bug actually use the phrase "Internet Explorer box model bug". --[[User:Voidvector|Voidvector]] ([[User talk:Voidvector|talk]]) 22:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)