9,487
edits
Changes
no edit summary
:We ''could''... but honestly I tend to prefer shorter infoboxes that don't overpower the article's text. <span style="font-family:Georgia, serif; color:#cccccc;">— '''''[[User:Admin|admin]]''''' • '''''[[User_talk:Admin|talk]]''''' </span> 07:36, 5 August 2008 (CDT)
::Yet if you look at any politician's page on Wikipedia, they tend to have pretty large Infoboxes. Isn't that what they're good for? Providing quick information? If someone needs the information for a paper, it's much easier to find it in an Infobox. After all, it doesn't make it that much bigger and it wouldn't be too hard to code.[[User:Sethisodd|Sethisodd]] 15:02, 5 August 2008 (CDT)
:::I see your point, but there are a few key differences:
:::*In general, Wikipedia articles are longer and more detailed than what we've got here (those with infoboxes even more so), so the text of the article continues well past the height of the infobox. (For example, see our two most recent House Speakers, [[Wikipedia:Nancy Pelosi|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Dennis Hastert|here]]; the infoboxes only go as far down the page as the table of contents.)
:::*On Wikipedia, if a politician's infobox lists his/her alma mater (and many [[Wikipedia:Charlie Crist|don't]]), that field doubles as a link to the corresponding Wikipedia article on the school. We generally only link to local schools.
:::It's important to keep infoboxes to a reasonable size because they use the same "float:right" CSS as images, which means if you add an illustrative image to an article with an infobox, that image gets bumped below the infobox instead of appearing inline with the article text. The [[John Appleyard]] article is an example of this. <span style="font-family:Georgia, serif; color:#cccccc;">— '''''[[User:Admin|admin]]''''' • '''''[[User_talk:Admin|talk]]''''' </span> 15:37, 5 August 2008 (CDT)