Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lists

single-item lists

The template {{infobox cocktail}} automatically forces a bulleted list for its main-alcohol parameters. Bulleted lists in infoboxes aren't unheard-of, though rare. However, that template forces a bullet even for single entrants, making the oxymoronic single-item list. Given there is no actual list created, should that template be invoking list markup for single variables? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean specifically? Can you point to an usage of the template where this is visible? Gawaon (talk) 04:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure, easy-peasy. In the infobox's implementation at mojito, there's a bulleted list with one item (rum). Given how the bulleted-list markup interacts with other variables like scrapers, screen readers, and more, are there any technical, grammatical, accessibility, or stylistic problems caused by a 'list' that then only has one entrant? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 06:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that looks odd. I'd say it should just be a plain wikilink in such a case, not a list. But ultimately you'll have to discuss that with the template authors. Gawaon (talk) 06:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Fixing that is a simple #if test to check for multiple parameter values. And it should probably use an unbulleted list, since bulleted ones are unusual in infoboxes and waste space in them. The more general ingredients list lower in the i'box might sensibly use a bullet list, but it could be CSS kerned to waste less horizontal space.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

A "bullet" (i.e., Unordered) list with no bullet at all would be better, as the list of recipe ingredients would look like a list of recipe ingredients. Try Template:Plainlist. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Made that recommendation in the template documentation. We'll see if it sticks.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

comparison articles

Many Wikipedia articles have a title that begins with "Comparison of ...". Is there a Wikipedia policy or guideline that specifically discusses such comparison articles? I hoped to find such a discussion when I went to WP:Comparison, but that currently redirects to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists, which only mentions the word "comparison" once, and even then it's not referring to comparison articles.

Is there perhaps some other Wikipedia policy or guideline that WP:Comparison *should* redirect to? DavidCary (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Who is doing the comparing - you or your sources? If it's you, then you possibly fall foul of WP:NOR and/or WP:SYNTH. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Redrose64, that sounds like good advice that *should* be in a Wikipedia policy or guideline that discusses comparison articles -- and perhaps already is. Similarly, I think I've read somewhere that: comparison articles should cite sources that actually compare things, and if no such sources can be found, then a stand-alone "comparison article" likely doesn't meet Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Notability guideline (but the same information may be OK as a subsection of the topic article).

Alas, I've been unable remember where I read that, hence the original question.

To answer your literal question: I'm often editing articles in the Category:Software comparisons category, which generally *do* already have sources doing the comparing.

--DavidCary (talk) 05:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Are these proper MOS:PSEUDOHEAD / MOS:DEFLIST edits?

Ost316 is making many edits like this one, claiming that bold headers are a MOS-related improvement over semicolon and asterisk markup. The semicolon markup appears to me to conform with MOS:DEFLIST's description of name-value or topic-value pairs, but I will defer to the experts here. The editor appears to have made hundreds of these edits. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a pretty core use-case of definition lists. Remsense ‥ 论 00:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

A definition list (MOS:DEFLIST) is a ; line followed by one or more : lines, not by * list items. So Ost316 is certainly right that the old syntax they are fixing is not proper deflist syntax and likely produces invalid HTML. Gawaon (talk) 06:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Right, of course. How is one meant to mix the two again, just open a {{blist}} after the :? Remsense ‥ 论 06:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I have never tried, but I suppose that would work. Gawaon (talk) 07:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

There are nonzero infobox situations where I'd just like to separate a bulleted list with headers thusly, even after slimming it down as appropriate. Unno. Remsense ‥ 论 07:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

In that case, just using bold markup around the header line, like Ost316 does it, doesn't seem the worst solution. Gawaon (talk) 08:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I searched the MOS:PSEUDOHEAD page for "semicolon", which I should have done earlier, and I found this explicit guidance, which says not to put * after ; markup. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

So I've just done a rudimentary bit of brainstorming, and I quickly realized this is a really easy—seemingly not previously addressed—itch to scratch. Behold, {{Bulleted dl}}:

Labor unions

Communications Workers of America District 1 and Local 1126

New York State AFL–CIO

Newspapers

The Post-Standard

Remsense ‥ 论 20:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at List of genocides § List ordering: Reverse or regular chronology

 You are invited to join the discussion at List of genocides § List ordering: Reverse or regular chronology. —Alalch E. 00:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

List formatting at Conversations about Important Things#List of Important Conversations lessons

Due to Conversations about Important Things entering its third year, I am exploring the idea of converting the list of topics from a table to a list, because most of the entries do not have a description. I wish to ask what format could I employ, taking into account the use of colons, dashes, and parentheses in the topic names? --Minoa (talk) 17:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Differences between lists about people

When I read some lists of people. I saw we can find differences among lists.

For exemple "List of Russian artists" contain potraits of people mentionned but not the "List of Turkish actors".

Unlike the "List of Russian artists" and "List of Swedish poets". The "List of Turkish actors" don't class names by alphabetical order but by year of birth then alphabetical order.

"List of Swedish poets" and "List of Turkish actors" don't contain portraits.

Can we create common norms for lists about people to avoid these differences ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Nope. This is clearly something that should be decided on a per-case basis based on what the editors decide is best for the given topic and situation. That's how our Manual of Style works in general. The point is to alleviate confusion and reduce friction, not impose uniformity for its own sake. Remsense ‥ 论 05:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

This is on a per-case basis (Understandable because Wikipedia is a big project and it would be impossible to manage all of that easily).

Therefore , the goal of the manual is not to impose uniformity but to alleviate confusion and reduce friction and live with disparities in absence of uniformity.

Did I righly understood ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 05:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I said verbatim, so you likely understand, yes. Remsense ‥ 论 05:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)