Template talk:Rangers F.C. seasons

	Association football portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
	This template is supported by the Scottish football task force.
	This template is supported by the season article task force.

Scotland

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles

Styling

(I left a comment with Dudesleeper on this, but it apparently didn't warrant an answer, so I thought I'd repeat my rationale here rather than just reverting for now.)

Here's how the template looks on my display. The weird "alignment" thing that it's got going on only works with specific font metrics, namely those of the default Microsoft Windows web fonts, and looks highly odd elsewhere. Rather than adding lots of extra markup so that the template has a subjectively prettier appearance on Windows, we should use the standard formatting which is used on every other navbox on the project (which also conveniently displays correctly if the template is widened). Making our templates less parochial will make it easier for outsiders to use and edit them, and we should be striving to do so wherever we can. If there's no better argument for keeping the styling, we should revert to using the new navbox child format. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was just reverted to the old format again. I can't see any further rationale for this: it should be changed back. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Err. I still don't see any questions in your comment to me - just statements about how we should do things. - Dudesleeper / Talk 10:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the response, then? Currently this template uses its own weird layout because of a quirk in the way it's displayed on Windows. Why not move to use the navbox system, which is what everyone else uses? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with that, just the fact that we spending six months using vertical dividers before someone decides bulletpoints are preferable, then it's back to the former. - Dudesleeper / Talk 11:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bullets are the recommended separators; I'm not sure why we were using pipes to begin with, other than as part of the general exceptionalism that the footy navbox templates have always had. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]