Module:Message box

CSS instead of tables

User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil Template:Moved discussion from Could this thing use <div style="display:table;"> and <div style="display:table-cell;"> instead of literal tables and table cells (<table>, <td>)?

Were the any previous attempts to remake this using <div>? If so, what was the consensus? Sapphaline (talk) 09:46, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A long time ago this would have been converted to divs but apparently IE sucked (this should not be news).

Today, I have User:Izno/Sandbox/Ambox with what are some skimmings and started a sandbox at Module:Message box/div. I have just done a very bad job of finishing this work. Izno (talk) 22:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Which might be closer to done than not, honestly. I think what it currently needs is to

1. Double check the ambox work
2. Add "soft" support for the other kinds of boxes (where soft is defined as module-supports but config disabled)
3. Merge tested /div version but not CSS into main
4. Enable boxes of each kind one by one.
   • Leave ambox for penultimate as the most likely to cause some mass noise in a way
   • Probably somewhere around here do ombox, that has some needed coordination
   • Leave tmbox for ultimate, there is work to coordinate
5. Fix bugs that are identified
6. Move CSS over to better-named stylesheet
7. Delete the /div CSS (I won't be too sad)
8. Remove main support for table versions, possibly rename some things

Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I have now put this plan in a publicly editable place at Module:Message box/div/doc. IznoPublic (talk) 00:26, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I didn't know you were doing this, so I made something similar. It seems to work:

• Module: [1]
• Styles: [2]

Iniquity (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I did it in its own sandbox because it's a longterm enough project not to be done in the main sandbox, which should generally be releasable ad hoc for trivial issues. Izno (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

And also, there are enough other dependencies that "just change the two or three places" isn't going to fly. Izno (talk) 17:06, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Where else do you think this will affect? ​​It seems that only the mobile version is oriented towards table.ambox, which can also be corrected by CSS Iniquity (talk) 17:09, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

I have already documented in Module:Message box/div/doc multiple places that will need careful work, ambox among them. Please feel free to peruse and ask questions about what's there and why. Izno (talk) 17:41, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Iniquity (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

What's broken here? I've probably wrong but AFAIK for accessibility the existing role="presentation" should suffice. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

You should always endeavor to use the default aria role element. In this case, that's not a table. Ignoring that, tables are shit for doing other presentation with. Izno (talk) 03:20, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

This /div work is great work, thanks for this waddie96 ★ (talk) 19:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I think we can do {{cmbox}} now. Based on what I wrote down before, the process of a rollout is:

1. Alert some key pages. Has to include some verbiage like

   A change is occurring to how {{cmbox}} is implemented to support mobile resolutions better. It may cause some temporary display weirdness. Further information is available at Module talk:Message box#cmbox migration.

   with some text at the specific section

   A change is planned to occur in how {{cmbox}} is implemented. It should help improve display at mobile resolutions now, and accessibility later. cmbox was chosen because it has lower reader-facing impact than most other message box types and it's fairly self-contained. The change to cmbox will likely pave the way for other message boxes ({{fmbox}} is probably next).

   You can expect some difference in styling from previous for a small period due to the job queue, after which it should return to "normal". You should be able to correct it manually if you want with one of the usual steps (purge, null edit, or dummy edit). If an issue with display persists, leave a comment here (this scenario may be possible with some unexpected setup cmboxes).

   • Here (here, here is the warning)
   • WP:VPT
   • MediaWiki talk:Common.css
   • Maybe WT:CAT and WT:CFD
2. Sync Module:Message box/sandbox to Module:Message box (first time only)
3. Within quick succession to next step, sync Module:Message box/configuration/sandbox to Module:Message box/configuration
4. Within quick succession to previous step, sync Module:Message box/div/cmbox.css to Module:Message box/cmbox.css

Izno (talk) 17:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

The /div main and config modules have got some other adjustments that now make it different from what will end up going live, so they shouldn't generally be synced directly. For future me. Izno (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Also messages now posted to VPT and Common.css. Izno (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

cmbox is deployed. Izno (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, cmbox has been basically quiet besides notes from the below. I will now work on fmbox, which should also be relatively low impact. I'm also starting to sketch out imbox which may need to interact with template content from Commons as well as c:MediaWiki:Filepage.css. Izno (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Turns out I don't currently have to worry about commons names, which is something I should have noted when I split message box CSS during the TemplateStylization. Izno (talk) 01:03, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

What does Template:Tq mean exactly?

Also, what can I help with. waddie96 ★ (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

All of the CSS for the message boxes was once in MediaWiki:Common.css. I moved it to TemplateStyles with some effort because of reasons.

This effort now that I've got my feet under me probably doesn't need much assistance. If you want to spend time on something, working on the problems listed at MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do#Infobox would be excellent. If you want to spend some time on stuff, crafting an infobox (using Lua or template) to fix our career statistics pages would be super helpful. Izno (talk) 00:27, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ping any progress? sapphaline (talk) 13:20, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

You can see the progress at Module:Message box/div/doc. Izno (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

imbox migration

A change is occurring in how {{imbox}} is implemented. It should help improve display at mobile resolutions now, and accessibility later. imbox was chosen third because it has lower reader-facing impact than most other message box types and it's fairly self-contained. (There is some other planning information in #CSS instead of tables.) (Previously, cmbox and fmbox were done.)

You can expect some difference in styling from previous for a small period due to the job queue, after which it should return to "normal". You should be able to correct it manually if you want with one of the usual steps (purge, null edit, or dummy edit). If an issue with display persists, leave a comment here (this scenario may be possible with some unexpected setup imboxes). This may also, but should not have, affected the already-migrated cmbox and fmbox, so if those also appear to have an issue, here is a good spot now. Izno (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

T367463

Since it's fixed, can the relevant CSS rule be removed? Andyrom75 (talk) 07:07, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@Izno, @Jdlrobson, ping. Andyrom75 (talk) 07:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

What do you think is fixed exactly? Izno (talk) 07:14, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

And what rule do you think should be removed? Izno (talk) 07:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Plural for {{Hooks}}

Please copy this sandbox version (not the current version, which links to Module:Message box/configuration/sandbox) to live.

Changes.

Let me know when done, and I'll update the documentation for the module, and make other tweaks.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC).

File:X mark.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before creating an edit request. Namely, making a change to a template used on 20 million pages because you created a template today? For a wording tweak? Please show a consensus that this is something desirable. Izno (talk) 18:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the archive I see you make changes without awaiting consensus. I find this modern gatekeeping behaviour unfortunate. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 02:48, 17 December 2025 (UTC).

Flinging some incorrect mud (I have been very public about the changes I've implemented of my own resort in this module even if you didn't find where) is not any more likely to convince me or anyone else of the value of Template:Em change (see also WP:OTHERSTUFF: your edit request is relevant, not any of my edits).

I also note that you were apparently able to implement the same display as what you wanted without making the change in this module. Izno (talk) 04:00, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

And just to be very clear, the two changes at my desire have been the following:

1. Supporting TemplateStyles. In this module, that had prior requests at Use TemplateStyles, A question to small param and TemplateStyle, and Site-local configuration.... I had set up MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do previously with provided description there, and have generally advertised that link every chance I get because I don't like being the only person spending time on making changes more accessible to a wider public (you may check what links here at your leisure), and had also generally mused about the problem Template:Em earlier at In the context of meta templates. That culminated, when I finally got around to it, in mbox is now TemplateStyled only and associated target link. For which there have been no complaints not trivially remedied.
2. Changing the table structure to divs. Template:Em change is right there and was also implicated in Aria roles and separately reinforced in the individual advertisements I've so far made, like cmbox migration. The cmbox migration section was incidentally also advertised to VPT.

Any other changes that I made were implemented due to requested edit. Izno (talk) 04:21, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't mind that you made intelligent changes to the module, saying "Ok I did it anyway" - in fact I absolutely support them. Even if I would have disagreed with them.

And yes, I coded around the obstacle by using an older method which I had previously used in {{Hook}} (which I created). People have "updated" that, I do them the courtesy of assuming that their updates add value, unless I know otherwise.

If someone wants to update {{Hooks}} in the same way that {{Hook}} was updated, they will have to, apparently, gain consensus. I won't.

If I see a problem on Wikipedia I like to fix it. If something stops me doing it one way, I'll usually try another.

Hope that is all clear, and that you agree with my sentiments.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:47, 17 December 2025 (UTC).