Last modified: 2006-06-22 17:28:03 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 6404 - Article size and footnotes -- 32k warning shouldn't include cite.php footnotes
Article size and footnotes -- 32k warning shouldn't include cite.php footnotes
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Page editing (Other open bugs)
unspecified
PC Windows XP
: Normal enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-06-22 12:58 UTC by PS
Modified: 2006-06-22 17:28 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description PS 2006-06-22 12:58:52 UTC
Some articles have extensive footnotes, which is good in some subjects for 
verification purposes and solid grounding.

I'm not convinced that footnote length should be counted in warning users 
about article length. 

Footnotes are optional, individual, and read as supplements to specific 
points. A well cited article should be of readable length, with "footnotes as 
needed."
Comment 1 Rob Church 2006-06-22 15:00:12 UTC
It's got sweet bugger all to do with editorial standards. It's got a lot to do
with browsers that choke on reams of text.
Comment 2 PS 2006-06-22 17:28:03 UTC
That doesn't sound like the impression [[WP:SIZE]] gives. Can you 
correct that page if it's in fact wrong? It reads as follows:

"In the past, technical considerations because of some now rarely used 
browsers prompted a firm recommendation that articles be limited to a 
maximum size of precisely 32 KB, since editing any article longer than 
that would cause severe problems. With the advent of the section editing 
feature, and the availability of upgrades for the affected browsers, 
this once hard and fast rule has been softened."

(That's the point you are making, only it seems that WP:SIZE considers 
it no longer an issue for the most part)


"However, there are still stylistic reasons why an article should not be 
too long. For stylistic purposes, external links, further reading, 
references, see also, and similar sections; tables, list-like sections, 
and similar content; and markup, interwiki links, URLs and similar 
formatting should not be counted toward an article's total size since 
the point is to limit readable prose..."

(That's the point I'm discussing, simply that the 32k warning count 
probably should not include cite.php footnote elements as well as these 
elements)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links