Baseball Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball 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.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

The divisions are always displayed the same way. It is always East, then Central, then West. It is displayed this way in the standings in every newspaper. It is displayed this way on Yahoo! MLB. It is displayed this way on the Major League Baseball Website when one looks at the standings. This is the convention used even by the entity itself.--The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

01-July-2009: I have changed Template:MLB to allow the navbox to auto-widen, depending on width of the browser window, by removing 2 nowrap directives that had forced 2 over-wide bottom lines. In early 2009, the Wikipedia WP:MOS accessibility guidelines had been updated to avoid pages that exceed 800x600 width on narrow windows. I changed this navbox by removing 2 occurrences of ((nowrap|...)) and a "<br>" that had forced the bottom of the navbox to display as 2 wide lines. Now, the MLB-navbox will auto-widen to fit the width of either narrow or broad windows in a browser. If a window is resized by the user, then the MLB navbox will auto-adjust to the specific width chosen by the user, rather than force display as 800x750 pixels (or wider). -Wikid77 (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just converted this template to Navbox, as part of an effort to standardize and simplify our templates. There is an alternative version in the sandbox, which some of you might prefer, as it's closer in appearance to the old version. Anyway, I leave it up to MLB editors to decide which you prefer.

In my opinion, the part at the bottom is too large and should be split off into a separate Navbox, leaving just a single line containing only the most significant links. Again, it's up to you guys to decide what you really want.

I've made a quick effort to clarify the bottom section by introducing groups, but I'm sure it can be improved.

--NSH002 (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I like it! I had been thinking about making a similar change, but never got around to trying it out. Regarding whether or not to split off the bottom links, that's something we can discuss. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:29, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, but I'd rather leave the discussion to people who know and care about the subject, and that certainly doesn't include me! Regards --NSH002 (talk) 21:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed a possible new format for this template in the sandbox. I think it conveys the same information in a much more space-efficient way, which is also closer to the standard default format for templates in general. Any comments? Colonies Chris (talk) 20:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the sandbox version is an improvement on the current. Thanks for doing this. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:21, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or is the steroid section just a little too large compared to the rest of the template? I know there's been a ton written about the issue and related events, and therefore we have a bunch of articles, but do we really need to link them all here? Seems a bit WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENTISM, at least in spirit. Some of them aren't even about steroids, such as the Pittsburgh Drug Trials, which was about cocaine. I think it needs a trim. oknazevad (talk) 04:47, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oknazevad, I should have checked here before when I cut out the steroid section. You agreed with me that this was UNDUE and recentism five years ago. I'm seeking to revisit this where more eyes will see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Template:Major League Baseball and steroids. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]