Template talk:Clear

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Why not br clear?[edit]

Resolved: Rationale explained.

Why don't you use <br clear="all"/>? ~iNVERTED | Rob (Talk | Contribs) 17:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Because MediaWiki's software often encapsulates that into an (otherwise empty) paragraph. Often there's nothing that can be done about that and it tends to look ugly. Also, a paragraph should be exactly that: a paragraph. Shinobu 17:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
The br element has nothing to do with paragraphs; I think you are thinking of the p element. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
{{-}} contains that markup.  Tcrow777  talk  04:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
And for br uses (when they are desired) it should be <br style="clear:both;"> (or left or right more specifically); the clear HTML (as opposed to CSS) parameter is deprecated. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


Test 1 - no clear[edit]


Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Stuck Section[edit]


*Test 2 - with above fix[edit]


Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Unstuck Section[edit]


  • It [br clear="all"] appears to work for this scenario, anyone else? — xaosflux Talk 01:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but see above for why it is not used. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

A similar problem[edit]

Resolved: Problem fixed.

Please have a look at wikt:Dervish#English. The Commons template overlaps with the translations table. Any suggestions? Wikipeditor 23:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Same at zh:陰城郡, if viewed at large font sizes.

Somewhat fixed them. (I simply moved them up in the code) However, I do find these [edit] links very misplaced. --Sébastien Leblanc ( Talk | E-mail ) 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Difference between <div style="clear:both;"></div> and <br clear="all"/>[edit]

Resolved: Duplicate topic.

What is the difference between <div style="clear:both;"></div> and <br clear="all"/>? -PatPeter 19:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at top of this page for the explanation. -- drini [meta:] [commons:] 01:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't subst[edit]

I think this template should not be substituted into articles. Many editors won't understand the purpose of the resulting HTML, however if they see a template they can find out what is used for. -- Patleahy (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Concur. The developers have said many times that WPians needs to stop worrying about server load, and the amount of server load this template will introduce by not being transcluded is incredibly negligible. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Empty div syntax[edit]

Is there any reason why it is not <div style="clear:both;"/>? This would require less bandwidth and not require the browser to set up a CDATA in the DOM that turns out to be empty. John Vandenberg 01:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Because some browsers don't recognize XHTML-style self-closing tags, so that would result in those browsers seeing a never-closed div. Even modern browsers can do this in some circumstances. Anomie 17:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
MediaWiki would turn it into the expanded syntax anyways. Ms2ger (talk) 16:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Then it might as well use the shorter syntax, just to keep the code leaner. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone actually look at the result?[edit]

Resolved: Wrong venue. "This template is evil" discussions belong at WP:TFD.

So someone developed another "cool" program. But the resulting page layouts look like a third-grader did them. There is no style, no artistic merit. Sometimes programmers need to have their computers disabled so that people who know what a page layout is actually supposed to look like can do a good job. "Clear" wiki is a miserable "tool". It's like using a hammer to put a staple in your term paper. And to answer your question, NO, It doesn't look better. (Taivo (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC))

Man, deal. Clear helps with overlapping hidden section and serves as a method for uninitiated users to order images and text. If you don't like the tool, write a new one. Protonk (talk) 05:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I dunno, my user page uses this template to keep the {{User committed identity}} at the bottom of my page. It works pretty well, if you ask me... Graham (talk, contrib, SIGN HERE!!!) 23:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


This should have left and right options, defaulting to both. There are cases where one might want to use one or other. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

{{clearleft}} and {{clearright}} do currently provide this functionality, although it would make sense to merge the templates – {{clear|left}} looks much nicer doesn't it? What I would personally like to see is a "clear and drop by..." option, to allow control of the spacing after clearing the left and/or right columns. It's not hard to do, for example adding <div style="height:10px; clear:both;"></div> would clear both columns and then add a margin of 10px past the base of both columns. It would also allow editors to easily space out objects such as tables without being confined to standardised line breaks; {{clear|10px}} is more compact and neat than the aforementioned code. I may try building such a template if no consensus exists to modify this one – Ikara talk → 00:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


This template should include a link to the template performing the opposite function. Right now I have an infobox forcing images halfway down the page into the wrong sections but I can't figure out how to remove its "clear"ing function. — LlywelynII 03:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

That is how floating elements work. There is no method to "reverse" floating, save for creating a new block context (a new div) and nest the new floating element in that. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 09:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

When having the template in the lead section below the 1st section (this is sometimes necassary for a page with multiple infoboxes), the table of content comes below the place where the clear template is placed. This should be the other way around, that the 1st section is started clear. Sander.v.Ginkel (Je suis Charlie) 22:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: It looks like you want to edit Template:Clear/doc, which is not protected, and not Template:Clear itself. You don't need a protected edit request to do that. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 23:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

{{-}} template[edit]

Hello! Regarding the recent redirection of the {{-}} template, I don't think that was the right thing to do. {{-}} and {{Clear}} templates are used for different purposes, with {{-}}'s primary use being adding some vertical whitespace where appropriate, for example between the external links and navboxes. Thus, {{-}} and {{Clear}} don't do the same thing, and IMHO the redirection should be reverted. Thoughts? — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 00:16, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Anyone? MSGJ, Edokter? — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Suggest you post at Template talk:- as this is where the discussion took place. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:06, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, done as instructed. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 10:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 September 2015[edit]

Two protected redirects, Template:Clr & Template:-, either need a template removed and a redirect category (rcat) template added or just an rcat added. Please modify {{Clr}} as follows:

  • from this:
#redirect [[Template:Clear]]
{{R fully protected}}
  • to this:
#REDIRECT [[Template:Clear]]

{{Redr|from template shortcut}}

And please modify {{-}} as follows:

  • from this:
#REDIRECT [[Template:Clear]]
  • to this:
#REDIRECT [[Template:Clear]]

{{Redr|from template shortcut}}

Template Redr is an alias for the {{This is a redirect}} template, which is used to sort redirects into one or more categories. As long as {{pp-protected}} and/or {{pp-move}} will suffice, the This is a redirect template will detect the protection level(s) and categorize the redirect automatically. (Also, the categories will be automatically removed when and if protection is lifted.) Thank you in advance! Painius  00:56, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg DoneMr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 23:19, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Mr. Stradivarius – the second template redirect, however, has not been changed. That's {{-}}, which at first shows that I'm allowed to edit it, then when the edit window opens, it shows cascade protection and will not allow me to change it. Can you help? Painius  23:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
@Paine Ellsworth: Oops, sorry about that... I've made the edit. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 23:50, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


@Edokter: I was surprised that {{br}} didnt work like <br/> and added a notice in the documentation. Please explain why it isnt needed. Christian75 (talk) 20:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

It is already listed as a shortcut. And while it does not use <br />, the effect is the same. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
The effect isnt the same: Eg. a<br/>b<br/>c gives:

a{{br}}b{{br}}c gives:




Christian75 (talk) 15:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

It certainly is surprising that a template named after an HTML element doesn't generate that element. That said, I can't think of a situation where I would actually use it. Clearance uses an empty div (this template); non-bulleted lists in infoboxes use {{plainlist}}; poetry can use <poem> markup; and the ancient MediaWiki bug that fails to generate paragraphs in <blockquote>s has been fixed. Hairy Dude (talk) 13:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Is it possible to add the second parameter?[edit]

I have added the second parameter on sandbox page, which can add additional CSS property to be used for experimental purposes, is it possible to receive it? -- Great Brightstar (talk) 16:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Unclear if it's necessary. Are there other templates with a similar design? If |2= is meant for experimental purposes, I'm assuming that tests can simply be done by transcluding the template's sandbox... or do you anticipate actual usage of |2= to be more widespread. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 17:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
You can see the effect on testcase page. --Great Brightstar (talk) 01:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I have already made an example to show the usage of this parameter on testcase page that you can see. --Great Brightstar (talk) 01:06, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
How about a named style parameter instead of an unnamed (numbered) parameter? This would be consistent with similar parameters in other templates. It would also keep the first numbered parameter optional, allowing, for example, {{clear|style=...}} to still default to clear:both;. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 04:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Updated the sandbox and testcases to reflect this suggestion. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 06:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
OK, it’s good. --Great Brightstar (talk) 07:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Please explain why you think additional styling is needed in this template. If you wish to experiment, please do so in a sandbox. I'm going to deactivate the template edit request because I do not think this change is either necessary or well-conceived. A template which simply clears has no business in arbitrary styling--we have other templates (or wikitext) for such. --Izno (talk) 11:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)