Wikipedia talk:Use subheadings sparingly

support/opposition

Note: this rule was adapted and modified for the new software, so I didn't copy the old supporter list. -- Lee Daniel Crocker, 23 April 2002

using subheads is good

Although they shouldn't be used for every line, I think using subheads is good. As an encyclopedia is made to find information, I think this should be made easier. Even for small articles, I find it convenient if there's a heading indicating in which part of the article I may find a short history, a collection of external links, or a simple example, or the specific detail I'm looking for. Also, subheads can help making it clear for a writer what he's writing about in that part of the article. jheijmans, 23 April 2002

single-line paragraphs with bolding

Is there a reason why many pages use single-line paragraph with bold character formatting instead of the "==" wiki syntax? -- user:Tarquin, 25 May 2002

wiki heading

bold heading

table of contents

While surveying the encyclopedia as a newcomer, I noticed that small articles (fit on the screen) with a heading or two seemed 'disrupted' or even a bit ostentatious, because of the automatically generated contents-table. The TOC takes top-space, bottom-space, and full-width. If content wrapped around the skinny TOC table, this issue would disappear. The TOCs made some articles in a preliminary stage of development (small) look top-heavy, but later when the piece fills out it will then be valuable. -- Ted Clayton, 27 August 2003

evaluation needed

Given how much Wikipedia has grown since this was written (April 2002), we need to have it renamed and expanded to explain all the relevant cases. For example, today it's not at all uncommon to see a table of contents with a dozen entries, but this is normally fixed by having a good lead section and placing an image to the right of the ToC. This guideline still applies to shorter articles, but it needs elaboration. --Joy [shallot] 13:34, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Joy [shallot]. Headings, subheadings, and subsubheadings are extremely valuable in long articles. The reader who has a specific area of interest should be able to look at the TOC and go directly to the relevant section. In that context, I have no problem with a particular section that's fairly short. For example, an article that's been criticized as overlong is John Kerry (currently 83kb). I don't think it's overlong, because it has good structure. Suppose a reader has heard that there's been controversy over Kerry's first Purple Heart. The reader who wants to know the basics of that incident will find, in the TOC, a heading for Kerry's military service, a subheading for the time he spent commanding a Swift boat, and a subsubheading for the first Purple Heart. That section has only one paragraph, but I think that's the correct organization. JamesMLane 10:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)