Tables are death to a living article. Except for standardized tables for a few routine situations, lists of the state bird, flower, motto, the taxoboxes for animals, etc., I believe tables should be assiduosly avoided. The more coding there is in an article, the less chance that people will edit it. I usually don't bother with any article that has a table in it on the theory that I can accomplish more elsewhere where there are none, which is identical to my policy on trolls and edit wars.
Tom P.
|From: Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca |X-Sender: bryan.derksen@shawmail |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:30:02 -0700 | |There is at least one area of wikipedia work that I do which I think HTML |comments will come in very handy; HTML tables. HTML tables can get quite |complicated and messy, and being able to leave notes for future editors to |help them add to the table is something I just don't see the talk: page as |being very good for. Very complicated lines of TeX might also benefit from |an HMTL comment or two, though I imagine math equations aren't as likely to |be modified by future contributors. | |In a closely related vein, there are a lot of articles which use |standardized "templates"; for example the planetary data sheets or the |tatobox for biological species. Filling the template with HTML comments |describing what sorts of stuff goes where, and what the preferred formats |are, will help to keep these things consistent when new people use the |templates. | |_______________________________________________ |Wikipedia-l mailing list |Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l |