{{mbox}} – Has namespace detection, for message boxes that are used on several types of pages thus need to change style depending on what page they are used on.
Template:Tmbox is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit protected}} to notify an administrator to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.
Template:Tmbox/styles – Shows the different suggestions for new styles for talk page message boxes. Has a special talk page to discuss the different designs.
Unless I shortly hear any objections, i am going to make this template substitutable. It is used on talk pages a lot, so the functionality is desirable. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why is substitutability advantageous in this template? Tmbox is a display template; it implements the current consensus for the appearance of message boxes. If that consensus changes, so too can the appearance of millions of boxes, with a few careful changes here. There are still thousands of implementations of the previous generation of talkpage message boxes precisely because they were not centralised through a metatemplate like {{tmbox}}, that's not a mistake we want to repeat. So yes, consider this an objection: there is no reason to make this template substitutable because there is no (common) reason to want to substitute it. Happy‑melon00:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
An option for background colours would be nice it seems there is no way to do it in the documentation other than substing which on a talk page is bad because it adds to the spam for people --Mistress Selina Kyle(Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉)10:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually figured it out and changed it already if you look at with my talk page, of course, style, thanks :) It should probably mention that in the description/documentation for people that don't know CSS ha.
Edit request - option for Padding
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Another thing though, is it possible to set the padding currently? I thought it would be padding=whatever in the CSS style but that doesn't appear to do anything for some reason, I am thinking the template probaby needs a separate setting added to it to let people change padding for some reason?
and table (this is what the New Wikilove button at top of the screen stuff uses at the moment, weirdly - and without centring set to, I just changed that in to make the comparison easier):
It's more noticable in larger boxes if you compare the padding around the picture in the Wikilove table: [1] to the much smaller padding tmbox uses : [2]
Tmbox is a table to which the style parameter is applied, and cannot have a padding. Default table cell padding is used. Tmbox has it's padding controlled by the tmbox CSS classes. I think that in the interest of having a standard formatting for all *mbox templates, it is best kept this way. — Edokter (talk) — 15:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the difference between the padding this template uses and the one the WikiLove function uses as I compared above, it looks to me like the padding underneath and above is missing - it looks slightly wrong There is padding to the left but above and below the image it just cuts off suddenly compared ot the WikiLove ne where it's even around all sides of the image like a pictureframe
The wikilove box is not a tmbox and has a different structure alltogether. But I see there is a textstyle parameter where you can override the default padding for the text (0.25em 0.9em). Example code added above. How does that look? — Edokter (talk) — 10:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Switch of mbox templates and category handler to Lua
I've made a request over at Template talk:Mbox about switching all of the {{mbox}} family templates, plus the {{category handler}} template, to use Lua modules. These templates have millions of transclusions, so I would appreciate comments and some more eyes on the code. Please let me know what you think over at the request page. — Mr. Stradivarius♪ talk ♪15:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That explains the enigma of your previous post, thanks. I tried to resolve the problem as initially stated by JTJ above by just changing "Tmbox" to "Mbox", but the mobile view still did not show the mbox. The devs have done some amazing things, so I trust to leave this gnarly challenge to them. PI Ellsworthed.put'r there18:40, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To editors Jinoytommanjaly, Andrybak and Paine Ellsworth: I got a related question on fawiki. I was under the impression that this is a "feature" (i.e. Tmbox is not for the readers, but the editors, so it is hidden in mobile view which is dominated by readers). Do you know if and how this can be fixed by custom user CSS? huji—TALK22:41, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mathglot This template is visible in mobile view now (except when used in the lede section, which is hidden entirely, but that's a separate problem). I'd appreciate if you could delete or redirect Template:Tmboxw to avoid future confusion. Matma Rextalk19:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Matma Rex:, do I understand you correctly, that you are fine with the workings of {{Tmbox}}, but you have an issue with Tmboxw? If so, can you please restate your request from the talk page of that template, and ping me there? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:41, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
_by_Ron.jpg)
