Help talk:Section/Archive 1

Archive 1

Section error

After when I saved the section edit, it was loaded back to the top of the article, talk, etc for most of times. When I click on section link or section redirect, it loaded to the top of the article, so putting in URL # follow by section name after the article name don't work, but only in the same article does. Clicking on section on table of contents worked fine, but URL doesn't change. I am in SBC Yahoo! Browser, but the Internet Explorer always worked fine. How can I change it to make it right. BlueEarth (talk) 01:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC) is not on the plan ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.134.25.91 (talk) 18:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe I'm having the same issue; I have asked for assistance here. Timneu22 (talk) 19:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Policy on section title length?

I have a question. I think succinct section titles are more appropriate than lengthy ones, so long as they accurately summarize the section, which is why I shortened a couple in the Expelled (film) article, but then someone reverted it, claiming "POV" edits. I looked all over the Namespace for a policy relating to section title lengths, but couldn't find out. Any ideas? Nightscream (talk) 04:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

2 sections

If there are two of the same-titled sections in an article, can you link to the bottom one? For example:

Section

Section

How would I link to this section, instead of this one? C Teng 22:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Like this. Algebraist 15:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


TOC

should the Table of Content contain See also, References and External links? i mean, i know it's Wikpedia's format, but i don't think that anyone goes to an article just for those. Usually, when you finish reading the article you see them, and you might even use them, but they don't sound precisely like "Content".Jimifloydrix (talk) 01:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I think they should be in the TOC, and yes, sometimes I go to an article for the "See also" or the external links.--Patrick (talk) 05:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

On the page Lycopene as of 21:00, 28 October 2010, two images were included at the end of the lead section, before the auto-generated TOC. The TOC appeared, but was on the right edge of the page, after the images, rather than below the images. Putting a __TOC__ page after the image tags in the source still rendered with the TOC at the left edge, so I moved the images into the first section; this rendered the TOC correctly. Is this a bug in the MediaWiki software when there is an image right at the end of the lead and thus directly before the TOC table?

TOC hiding

Did I miss where the defaults changed so that the TOCs are hidden by default? It looks terrible! Ford MF (talk) 16:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

A related question: Where can I set hiding as default TOC behavior for a specific page (hide as in collapsed)? __meco (talk) 05:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

TOC After Restore

On Talk:Spore (2008 video game) the TOC now has it's first entry as header located within a template that is shown before the TOC. Is there any way to force a header (or the TOC) to not show a specific header? Or does anyone know of a better way? Or is this working as intended? :) ClosedEyesSeeing (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

new line

I have a üproblem. on many pages people add an extra line between the headline/new section and the content like [1]. we should mention this here... or is it anythere in the wiki? mabdul 0=* 10:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Abbreviated TOC

On the Mel Gibson article, the TOC shows up with only the first sub-section headings and none of the ones under that. I can't seem to figure out why. Could someone help? Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

That's because the code {{TOClimit|limit=2}} in the wiki text, just above the start of the "Early life" section; see Template:TOClimit. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Apparently I didn't know where to look. Wildhartlivie (talk) 17:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Two column TOC

Is there a way to make a two (or three, four,...) column TOC? bamse (talk) 18:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Date ranges in section names?

I'm currently slowly copyediting the history of Jerusalem article. One of the new questions that this article raised for me was if date ranges in a section heading should use the ndash or not. The problem with using the ndash is that it would be a little troublesome for wikilinks to specific sections. Is there a convention for dates in article section titles? I didn't see anything mentioned in the MoS for naming sections. Jason Quinn (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

wgMaxTocLevel

At Section editing#Globally limiting the TOC depth there is a vague reference to a |wgMaxTocLevel= for limiting the TOC levels, but no example, suggestion of format or advice on where/how it should be used/placed.

Could somebody (who knows how to invoke it) append an example. Many Thanks, —Sladen (talk) 11:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Floating TOC - when can it be used?

What does it mean that the TOC can be floated "should be used when it is beneficial to the layout of the article," and who decides when it is appropriate? I often use a floating TOC to remove white space from an article and to allow the narrative to flow. I don't use it when there are a plurality of boxes, templates, etc. used in an article because it often results in such a small strip of narrative that it does not make sense. The page states that "it can, in some instances" be used, but does not clarify when or what circumstances make it acceptable. I have recently been introduced, rather forcefully, to a small cadre of editors who demand that a floating TOC is not an acceptable format and any floating TOC should be deleted, which of course allows for the return of white space, lack of flow, and not ressembling hard printed articles. Some clarification on who gets to make the rules and when they should and should not be enforced. Any guidance would be appreciated. Cheers. --StormRider 20:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Alert! The request above comes with baggage and contains language that represents only one side of a dispute regarding Storm Rider's strong protection of his favored format. Here are the relevant links:
Please read them first and factor them into any response. One admin has already expressed a willingness to censure or block Storm Rider for his "personal attacks and other such nonsense" in this matter.
OTOH, the request contains elements that do deserve an answer independently of any existing dispute(s). -- Fyslee (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
No dear Fyslee, this has nothing to do with your ongoing desire to argue. The question above has everything to do with guiding all editors on the use of a floating TOC. This guidance will be helpful in your ongoing desire to conform all articles to the default style and will also address my need to know when it is appropriate to use and when not. I am glad to see you continue to follow my around; however, I do find it strange. It seems like stalking. Cheers.--StormRider 22:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Answered on your talk page. -- Fyslee (talk) 05:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


Auto-numbering in the TOC

I am still a bit of a novice in the wonderful world of Wiki. I want to disable the auto-numbering system in the compact table of contents. Can you help? Is it possible? Its messing up my numbering system! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capassist01 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


Please let's keep this discussion in one place. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. This should be dealt with at the MOS policy/guideline level. -- Fyslee (talk) 05:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Naming

I expanded with some general advice on section naming here, because Wikipedia:Words to avoid#Article and section titles is currently reserved only for maintenance of NPOV (see Wikipedia_talk:Words_to_avoid#Research_as_a_section_heading. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Probiotic#Research was the latest victim I found of such sections. However, I could easily find worse examples on request. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

References section

For a while now (maybe since I downloaded firefox 3?), the reference sections in various wikipedia articles don't, along with the reference heading and article categories, display. It's entirely random apparently. The same article will display one day, not the text. It's getting really annoying now as I often can't check these sections in proofreadings. What's going on? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 07:38, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect from Help namespace to mainspace

Why is Help:Section linking and redirects redirecting to The California Museum for History, Women and the Arts? I can't find any good reason for that... Jean-Fred (talk) 21:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Sections template

I just added the{{sections}} template to Siege of 's-Hertogenbosch, but I cannot find any mention of that template here, or by searching. I did it by just trying it. This template should be mentioned here, but only with a link to the documentation, which I have not found. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:25, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

did something change?

On my talk page the {{TOCright}} used to perfectly align with the horizontal rule of the first section. Something's changed recently though and it no longer does and I was hoping anybody could help me out? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 20:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Making a heading that does not show up in ToC

I'm not sure why we have this section in the Help page. It is of no use to any editor, and may be of marginal use to someone running their own wiki. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was merge into Help:Section. -- – imis☂ 14:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contents_box limited info and duplicating Help:Section. Needs merging. – imis☂ 03:53, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Eh....vb ery well as long as it's merged and intergrated support merge. ResMar 01:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How to Create a TOC

Maybe I'm just crazy, but I don't see where the article says how to create a table of contents on pages with less than 3 sections. Someone may want a table of contents on a page in this case because they know and want to encourage new sections be added to the article, or perhaps they just archived their comments on their user page and don't have 3 new comments yet. MATThematical (talk) 06:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


H2 tag not creating TOC if styled

Hi, I was wondering why <h2> testing</h2> will create a TOC, but not if I put <h2 style="border-bottom:0;"> test</h2>. The problem is, I want it to appear in the TOC but it won't. --Bluesoju (talk) 08:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

There is a break in your second example after the >. The header shows, but not in the TOC. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response, what if I want to change multiple things like <h2 style="margin:.5em; margin-top:.1em; border-bottom:0; color:black; font-size: 188%; line-height:1.2em"> test </h2> How do I go about that without using ; ?--Bluesoju (talk) 00:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
The colon has nothing to do with it. The markup must be on one line— you have two line breaks in the last example. The line breaks should work in standard HTML, but the MediaWiki parser does not see to like it when it builds the TOC. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 01:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Misunderstood you sorry! Works now. Thank you --Bluesoju (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

two questions

  1. Is it possible to hide the bullet numbers in TOC – without individual CSS for all users? It´s for a WP-site, not for an article.
  2. Is there a way to color the TOC? It´s for an other WP-site, not for an article.

Greets, Hæggis (talk) 21:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, just add the appropriate CSS to your MediaWiki:Common.css page. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
And in future ask general questions about doing stuff in MediaWiki at the MediaWiki support desk, not here. Algebraist 22:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I didn´t tell that the perfect solution would be a template, ´cause if there is a second WP-site with many numerals in toc, it would need an extra-entry in Commons.css.
The support desk of MediaWiki is death at the moment, there are no answers since months and the already in the introduction selectable site for my question ("Formatting Support (Templates, Tables, Infoboxes, CSS …)") is closed since 2008. I´m going to ask at Meta-Wiki, thanks for help. Yours since early, Hæggis (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Page blanking

This page wasn't supposed to be blanked, moved, deleted, or merged in any way right? 'Cause someone blanked the page a little while ago. I reverted it and posted a notice on their talk page, but I just wanted to make sure of what I was doing. Thanks! --Flaming Goldfish (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

TOC for subsubsections within a subsection

I would like to have a compact TOC for only the subsubsections within one of the subsections of an article. Can anyone tell how to do his? --Newwhist (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if it's exactly what you're looking for but {{TOC limit}} may help. You can also try asking at the Wikipedia help desk. -- Ϫ 13:31, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I was looking for exactly the same thing in the vaults a few days ago – to use in conjunction with a main TOC with depth limit because it had become unweildy through vast arrays of subsections. When limiting the main TOC, small TOCs for each subsection (if lots of them) would be a more manageable alternative. I came to the conclusion it doesn't exist but may be constructed... job number 50014. Trev M  ~  14:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Stopping TOC listing across linked page

Hi

On the page Talk:Turkish invasion of Cyprus I have created a hide bar (section at bottom)

The problem is that although the bar transcludes a page Talk:Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus/Rfcjuly2010oldcomments into the bar the contents are also showing up in the TOC. Is there any way to prevent thenm from showing in the Talk:Turkish invasion of Cyprus TOC?

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 22:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

You are transcluding a page that has sections, therefore the sections will show in the TOC. You can remove the section markup and replace it with bold markup. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 00:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 71.130.106.81, 15 September 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}


71.130.106.81 (talk) 23:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Salvio Let's talk 'bout it! 00:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
SPAM bot trying the waters. Just after this, an ad to a BMW forum showed up.
Jeffrey Walton Noloader (talk) 19:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

TOC Collapsed (on initial view)

Hi All,

I have a TOC that is similar to this page's TOC. Its one massive run-on, and looks like fido's ass with all the white space. The page is offsite at http://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Linux. Also, {{TOC limit|limit=2}} results in an unknown template.

I'd like to specify that the page be served up with the TOC collapsed. How does on perform the magic?

The same question was asked in TOC hiding bu User:Meco and never answered. But the question might have been skipped since the statement is a bit off topic for the title.

Jeff Noloader (talk) 18:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

There should be a setting in your Preferences under the "Appearance" tab. -- Ϫ 19:54, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Add table content to TOC

I have a list of Tables in an article. All of them feature a caption.
Is it possible to show these captions (or even a header or any text) in a TOC?

table_1
A B
table_2
C D

I would prefer not to move the caption of each table into the article as a section like so:

table_1
A B
table_2
C D

Marcel.kummer (talk) 12:11, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Sections for short articles

This article starts with "A page can and should be divided into sections" I think this should be changed to "A page of five or more paragraphs can and should be divided into sections" (italics indicate addition) so that we aren't instructing editors to try divide short, stubby, articles into sections; and so we don't have people hanging '{{sections}}' templates on one paragraph long stubs. RJFJR (talk) 21:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It's actually a nice idea but let's see what other editors think. -- Joaquin008 (talk) 19:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Usage of subsections

I am curious as to what, if any, the guideline or standard procedure is or might on the usage of subsections? This seems to be the most relevant page to ask the question, as I was recently "bitten" for using subsections where it seemed logical, despite being unable to find much guidance on usage, aside from "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose" (see Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout#Headings_and_sections).

While I agree with a couple of the reverts made (I was basing them on the usage of subsections elsewhere on the page, i.e. a principle of internally consistent usage), the commenter said that subsections should be avoided, something that runs at odds with the particular flavor of my academic training in writing, i.e. clarity of content organization. This is made in light that people using Wikipedia will (from my own experience and observation), using the ToC, often go to a particular section of a long article to find material, rather than reading the whole article.

Given that the section headings are available in theory down to ======h6=====, how much are mere ===heading3=== (subsections) to be avoided? Is it a rule of avoidance unless "necessary" (and what constitutes necessary?) as suggested by the commenter, or one of moderation? When several distinctly clustered but only vaguely related ideas are headed together across several full paragraphs with no intuitive order (i.e. not chronological), or in the case of history, clear and distinctive themes or "arcs of events", are subsections sometimes warranted? Has any discussion already been done on this matter? I am afraid to do much work until this is clarified, for fear of being bitten again. Please advise, as I think others too might find this valuable and useful. Morgan Riley (talk) 21:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Not an edit request from a newb

Anyone have any ideas why there are so many misplaced edit requests here? Is there some confusing link to Help:Section somewhere that’s making people want to edit the wrong page? Vadmium (talk) 13:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC).

Misplaced newbie edit requests

A discussion at WP:VPR#Add the ability to override the default "this page is protected" edit notice may give the ability to override the standard MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext notice, which may be useful for this page. Please comment there. Thanks. Anomie⚔ 15:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI, you should now be able to create Template:Editnotices/Protection/Help:Section to display a different notice when non-autoconfirmed users try to edit Help:Section. Anomie⚔ 15:02, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

empty sections

I could swear that back when I first started editing I read something that said there should not be empty sections in articles, but it doesn't seem to be here anymore. Did that change or am I just looking in the wrong place? Beeblebrox (talk) 08:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Given that an editor just added a bunch of empty sections to an Arrested Development article, I'd like an answer to this myself. Doniago (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Be bold and delete 'em — unless there's an {{Under construction}} template in place. — Robert Greer (talk) 16:22, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

NOTOC

Has NOTOC quit working? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Seems to work fine, judging by 2004. Why do you ask? Anomie⚔ 19:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Oops! I am referring to the wrong command. I meant to ask about the NOEDITSECTION command... I will do some additional investigating. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
You're right about that one. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 93#NOEDITSECTION stopped working, T333647, and r100756. No idea when the fix will actually be applied to Wikipedia. Anomie⚔ 01:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Agreed completely. I personally believe that the NOTOC has stopped functioning. Abhijay Talk?/Deeds 06:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Placing "edit" button near Section name

How can I set this option? On German Wikipedia it's enabled by default. With the huge resolutions today, it's really annoying to have the "edit" buttons so far on the right on the screen. When you have short sections, you can't be sure you push the right "edit" button. —  Ark25  (talk) 07:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

It's one of the options available here. Doniago (talk) 14:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! —  Ark25  (talk) 01:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
All part of the service. :) Doniago (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Section linking does not work for me

You may need to look at this post in edit mode to see the coding issue I'm trying to illustrate

displayed text

is supposed to link to the section with "displayed text"

But for me, it doesn't work as expected.

For instance,

If I copy the illustration, put double brackets and don't put in an extra space before "Health" ("| Health") the result is

[effects of particle pollution]

It displays " effects of particle pollution"

as a link, but when clicked that link does not go to the "health effects" section, but only to the top level article "Particulates"


As an experiment,

Health effects of particle pollution

Returns a link that looks as it should,

(It says "Health effects of particle pollution")

But when you click on it, it does not actually go to the health effects section. It goes to the general article, i.e., the same as if the link were just Particulates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 02:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The syntax [[page name#section name|displayed text]] does work for an internal link. For example, [[Particulates#Health_effects|Health effects of particle pollution]] gives "Health effects of particle pollution" just as intended.
However, the syntax is different for external links, i.e. those beginning with "http://". In that case, you use a space instead of a pipe character and use only one bracket: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates#Health_effects Health effects of particle pollution] gives Health effects of particle pollution. Anomie⚔ 02:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
This has also been asked and answered at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Section linking does not work for me. Please don't ask the same in different places, and if you do it anyway in a special case then link them together. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Collapse TOC

Is it possible that TOC is auto collapsed? I want to have a collapsed TOC for the article I am working into.--Renzoy16 (talk) 15:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Looking for a vertical/horizontal TOC

I'm wondering whether anyone here can help me find an alternative TOC for an article I'm working on that has a long TOC. It's for White House Farm murders, where the toc is necessarily long and becoming hard to read, but the horizontal toc (see this version) looks confusing.

What I'm looking for is a TOC that's a vertical/horizonal mix that would produce something like this:

1 The Bambers (1.1 Nevill and June Bamber; 1.2 Sheila Caffell; 1.3 Jeremy Bamber; 1.4 Extended family and financial considerations)
2 The murder weapon
3 White House Farm, 7 August 1985 (3.1 Sheila's visit; 3.2 Telephone calls), and so on.

Does such a thing exist? SlimVirgin (talk) 21:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course you can make a custom TOC with hand-made section links like this and this and, then, override the MediaWiki TOC table with __NOTOC__. But this solution will require a future maintenance each time when sections will be renamed or rearranged. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Probably not a good idea, given the maintenance issue, and not sure I'd know how to do it anyway. Thanks for the reply. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:41, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Transcluding sections

Sections can now be transcluded by use of <section> and the #lst and #lstx functions. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 17:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing references in section

Hi, I was wondering if it would be possible to show the references in the 'Show Preview' view that are added to a section (not sure if this is the right place to ask for such a feature request). If one now wants to edit a section, then the preview only shows the section that has been edited. The references, usually placed at the bottom of the article, could have changed as well and any typos in the references therefore become unnoticed. A novice editor in particular might find previewing the references useful. Qsq (talk) 20:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

This is addressed in this article now. I haven't checked the history to see when it was added. You can add a {{Reflist}} template to your section temporarily, preview it to ensure that the references look right, and then delete the {{Reflist}} template before you save changes. Jonesey95 (talk) 03:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Prevent adding headings to TOC

Hello, on the German Wikibook there is the page Modul:LuaDokumentation which includes other templates as examples containing headings. Those headings are now added to the page's TOC and make it ugly. Is there a way to say the Wikimedia software to not include headings in special areas to the TOC? Maybe a special div block? I know, that I can replace the default TOC, but I am just curious, whether there is a better way. Greetings Stephan Kulla (talk) 17:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

See {{TOC limit}}, which has a version on the German Wikipedia. --  Gadget850 talk 18:49, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes I know it, but it would not help, because the included headers are h2 headings and they cannot be excluded without excluding the other useful headers, too. Now I have a solution with creating the my own TOC. Greetings Stephan Kulla (talk) 19:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Has there been a change in the TOC code?

Hey, y'all. I was just wondering if there had been some sort of change in the code for the automatic table of contents on articles? I have noticed on a few articles that the table is now putting section headings onto two lines, rather than simply expanding as much as possible to fit everything in on one. I don't really like the new look, so I was wondering if this had been changed by consensus or just by chance? Thanks in advance for any replies! Andre666 (talk) 14:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Yo, anyone got any knowledge on this? Andre666 (talk) 15:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I noticed yesterday the TOC on my user page and some (all?) articles has expanded to the full width of the page (never seen that before), but then it's still the normal width on some pages, like MOS:BIO. What's up with that? If it's a new default, is it possible to limit TOC width for articles with infoboxes so they don't overlap? Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 15:22, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Glitch from changes to the TOC structure in the last update. Do a bypass to fix: WP:BYPASS. --  Gadget850 talk 15:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! That got it. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 15:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

What is the default TOC limit?

I don’t see this mentioned anywhere on the page, though I would have expected to see it in the section on limiting the depth of the TOC: What is the default depth limit, if there is one? Or is every section heading, all five possible levels, included by default? —Frungi (talk) 06:43, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The default is that every heading is shown. I've added a sentence to make this explicit. See the current contents of User:John of Reading/Sandbox for an example. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Table-of-contents-crx

I would like to inform you that my 'table-of-contents chrome extension' [2] creates an expandable toc on the left, always visible, that facilitates reading of long articles. Synagonism (talk) 09:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2013

big boss 7 winner is Gauhar khan

120.59.230.182 (talk) 19:06, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --ElHef (Meep?) 19:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Complication about renaming a section: moving out Section linking and redirects subsection

The telling about "A complication is that, unlike renaming a page, renaming a section does not create any redirect from the old section name. Therefore incoming links to the old section name will have to be fixed." and so on, is put in the "Section linking and redirects" subsection (subsection of "Section linking" section).

However the issue is not related specifically to redirects, it applies to every link to a section

So that telling should be moved out "Section linking and redirects" subsection to the main "Section linking" section

Furthermore the Template:HA cited there has been deleted. --109.53.197.85 (talk) 11:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Auto-collapse the TOC

Probably a dumb question, but is there anyway to auto-collapse the TOC? _NOTOC_ gets rid of it completely, but I want to just have it collapsed on the page by default (with the "show" option available, obviously). This isn't for an article, just for a user talk page. Manning (talk) 03:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Manning, see Template:TOC hidden. :) (only a year late ;) –Quiddity (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Still counts. Can't for the life of me remember what I wanted to know this for though. Cheers Manning (talk) 23:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Linking to a subsection

Greetings! Does anobody know how to make an intra-link to a subsection? For example, if there was an hypothetical article Alphabet, and it had a section called == Vowels == and a subsection === Letter A ===, how can you make an intra-link to the subsection === Letter A ===? (Alphabet -> Vowels -> Letter A)

I tried to find an answer from the Help -section, but there was no mention of such a case. Therefore, I'd like to suggest that such instructions are included to the current Help -site :P Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

@Jayaguru-Shishya: Please see the answer left at Help talk:Link#Linking to a subsection, also WP:MULTI. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2014


Hi admin please edit the article list of indian records in swimming. 25 meters short corse its incomplete correct infomation is 25 meters 23.12 secs, 50 meters club india. Name Vijay Jesudas Kanthraj world championship, Held at Italy Torino. Please update the correct information. Thank you News deccanherald (talk) 20:05, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@News deccanherald: Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Putting "New Section" elswhere

Cross posted from here as I wasn't scertain where was better

On my talk page I receive a lot of RFC's I like to keep them separate from the actual discussion with editors on my page for clarity's sake. Is there a piece of code I could insert which would allow the pressing of the New Section button to have their section created mid page rather than at the bottom of the page? SPACKlick (talk) 11:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:MULTI, I've answered on the original thread. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Is it possible to exclude a specific section from the TOC?

Hello, I'd like to remove this #Notes section from the TOC. Is it possible? Thanks. 87.113.0.175 (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Look at it now, is that what you wanted? GB fan 19:33, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, ; was a good work-around in this case. I'd still be interested to know if it's possible to have a specific ===SubSection=== removed from the TOC. Cheers. 87.113.0.175 (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
@GB fan: Please don't use semicolons in that manner, see MOS:ACCESS#Headings where it says "do not make pseudo-headings using bold or semicolon markup". This was discussed recently at Help talk:Wiki markup#semicolon issue? and also at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout#Headings. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2015

<!- hi wikipedia and i have information on mushrooms that could be useful to mushroomers (mushroom people)-->

BayleytheBanana (talk) 09:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@BayleytheBanana: Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:31, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Appearance of heading 4, 5 and 6

In my opinion, heading 4, 5 and 6 should not have the same formatting (font-size, font-weight, colour etc.). For example, in Japanese grammar #Ancillary words, heading Topic, theme, and subject: は wa and が ga looks the same as heading Thematic wa, although the second section is a sub-section of the first. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 17:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@SelfishSeahorse: Outside the scope of this page. The styling of headings is done with sitewide CSS; if you want advice on how to alter it for yourself, try WP:VPT or WP:HD; if you want it changed for all users on all Wikimedia projects, start an RfC at meta: and then when consensus is reached, file a formal request at phab:. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
@Redrose64: OK. Thank you! --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 14:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
How about level 7, though not often or even used. 333-blue 09:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
@333-blue: There is no such thing as a level 7 heading. If you try it:
=Like this=
what you get is a level 6 heading, plus two spare equals signs. The reason for this is simple: HTML has only ever provided six levels, all the way from "HTML Tags" (which predates HTML 2.0) to the most recent formal standard, HTML5, so there is nothing for the MediaWiki parser to map seven equals signs to. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

why the first level heading, with an = at left and an = at right, is not used ?

i see they are not used. why? --Qdinar (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qdinar: Because the page already begins with an automatically generated level 1 heading, this being the page title (in this case it's Help talk:Section) and there should be only one level 1 heading on a page. This is for accessibility reasons: see MOS:ACCESS#Headings. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
why is it decorated with more little letters , than autogenerated first level heading? see test at User talk:Qdinar . --Qdinar (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean by "more little letters"? --Redrose64 (talk) 16:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
smaller font --Qdinar (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Ah, that's one of the strange things about Vector skin. In the MonoBook skin, they're the same size. I shall look at it in more detail after I finish work today. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:10, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I've found that the presence of the mw-body-content class alters the font-size of a <h1>...</h1> element from 28.8px to 25.2px. I don't know why that might be; I think that either Edokter (talk · contribs) or Krinkle (talk · contribs) may be able to help better than I can. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Redrose64, that happens to all conten text; .mw-body-content in Vector has its font-size set of 0.875em to make the running text 14px. Monobook (and pre-Typography Refresh in Vector) still use 0.8em (13px) for the content. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 07:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible table of contents

There are several articles with extremely long tables of contents, including this one. Is it possible to make the table of contents collapsible (so that it will be less difficult to navigate?) Jarble (talk) 05:04, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

It's already collapsible, that's what the "[hide]" link at the top does. If you want to limit the depth of subheadings that are shown, the |limit= parameter of {{TOC right}} does that - it's covered by H:LIMITTOC. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:39, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2016

for the birthdate of Stafford Elliot aka Fred Locks it is June 7, 1950.

2601:19B:8103:7F30:E925:2212:2791:DDC1 (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2017

__NOEDITSECTION__ 83.169.216.7 (talk) 17:25, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

End of section

No mention about how can one mark the end of the (e.g. last) section. [3] —Mykhal (talk) 10:19, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

It might be the case that only the last section needs the marker. —Mykhal (talk) 10:23, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
@Mykhal: We don't mark ends of sections. A "section" - so far as MediaWiki is concerned - runs from a level 2 heading to the next level 2 heading, or to the end of the page, whichever comes first. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, I see that we don't yet mark it, as you can see. However, some bottom items are often semantically clearly not part of the last section, and are standalone. —Mykhal (talk) 15:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Some years ago - can't remember when or where - there was a discussion about whether there should be some sort of division between the five standard appendices, each of which has a level 2 heading (Works or publications; "See also" section; Notes and references; Further reading; External links) and the standard footers or "bottom matter" (succession boxes, etc.) none of which have a heading. The consensus reached was that there should not be any such division. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2017

Hello, can you please remove the "promotes" template at the top of the Wikipedia page for "Inovalon." If unable to do so, can you please tell me specifically what needs to be changed in the entry to have the box removed. Thank you. Irajkantor (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. If possible, please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. If you cannot edit the article's talk page, you can instead make your request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for edits to a protected page. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Revert Clarification

Moved from User talk:Redrose64 § Revert Clarification
 – Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello,
I saw that you reverted one of my edits here, and you may have been correct in doing so. I probably should have left a better explanation as to why I chose to make that edit. I removed the text "with two underscores on either side of the word" because it seems redundant, since the exact code that needs to be inserted into the wikitext is highlighted, including the underscores. The way it reads now:

"When either __FORCETOC__ or __TOC__ (with underscores on either side of the word)..."

It's a bit confusing, since there is no need to add that the underscores are needed. However, for the first edit, where the text reads:

"...unless the magic word __NOTOC__ (with two underscores on either side of the word) is added..."

I can see why having this extra clarification might be warranted, because the text actually uses the word "word", and some people might then disregard the underscores, even though they are shown within the highlighted code. I suppose this might be a matter of preference, but I think there is an argument to be made for why that text should be deleted.

I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia editing, so I'm not sure exactly how it's decided when something is "vandalism" versus a "good faith" edit. When I made the edit, I realized that I could be wrong and would be open to hearing an argument as to why the deleted text is not redundant. But I didn't think that the edits would be considered vandalism given that it seems like something that people could legitimately disagree about. Is there a guideline that I'm missing here? Would it automatically be considered vandalism if there isn't a specific reason given in the edit summary?

Thanks :)
CeraWithaC (talk) 17:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

@CeraWithaC: I did not describe your edit as "vandalism" anywhere, either by the use of that word or accepted abbreviations like "vand" or "rvv".
As to why I partially undid your edit: in some fonts, consecutive underscores are distinct so it is clear that there are two; but in many fonts, they run together to form one continuous line, and to the users of such fonts, it might not be clear that two are being used. It is important that exactly two are used: if three or more are used, the extra ones are displayed as ordinary characters which will probably be undesirable; if only one is used, the magic word simply won't work. This is why we stress that there are two before and two after.
Apart from that, there were two other problems with your edit: (i) you altered __NOTOC__ (with two underscores after) to __NOTOC_ (with one underscore after); (ii) you removed a <nowiki>...</nowiki> pair, which (if it had not been for problem (i)) would have prevented the display of the TOC on that page.
Accordingly, I ask you to please revert your last edit. If you still feel that your changes are justifiable, please do so by discussing here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:47, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Oh! Okay, see this is actually good, because I didn't read it as two underscores on both sides, I read it as two on either side, which to me sounds like 2 total (which also explains my other editing error, which was just because I accidentally deleted and then retyped it the way I thought it was originally- with 1 underscore on each side). So maybe we should reword it to clarify that (maybe say '4 total')? That totally changes things then, and that clarification is most definitely needed.
As for the vandalism thing, I just learned something very obvious that I probably should've learned a long time ago. I was just seeing the option "Rollback (Vandal) above your revert, and I thought that was applied to the reason you gave (rather than as an option for me to rollback your revert). Ooops :P
And then the last thing I'm a little confused about, because I never intended to rollback your revision on that page, is that what I did?
CeraWithaC (talk) 21:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
I don't know why you might see "Rollback (Vandal)" above my revert - I certainly don't. You can't have rollbacked it, because you do not have the rollback right - if you did, it would say "(rollbacker)" against your name here, similarly to how my own entry says "(administrator)". Are you going to revert your edit? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

What is the template name for the autogenerated ToC template? Where can I find this?

I observed that in te.wikipedia.org. Table of Contents of any page still shows the English name "Contents" for the header. I'm looking for the template page for that. I coudn't find it anywhere template:TOC is being redirected to Compact_TOC page.

What am I missing? Also, where are the actual translations residing?

Thank you

--Criticpanther (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Replied at Wikipedia:Help desk#Where to find the AutoGenerated ToC template? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Section transclusion doesn't always work

I've noticed that the section transclusion feature often doesn't work in the way that this page describes it. For example, {{:Authoritarianism|transcludesection=Gender_and_authoritarianism}} seems to transclude the entire page instead of just one section. Is there a bug in this template that prevents it from working as intended? Jarble (talk) 01:55, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

You are mixing two different features. Your code would only work if the wanted part of Authoritarianism had been marked as described at Help:Section#Section marking. If you want to transclude a whole existing section defined by a section header then you don't need to mark it but can transclude it with #lsth at Help:Labeled section transclusion: {{#lsth:Authoritarianism|Gender and authoritarianism}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Out of date? (References and others)

Has there been a relatively recent change to the software to show references in a preview for a section even if {{reflist}} or similar is not present in the section? I ask because I definitely see this behavior when editing but I don’t recall if I enabled some beta feature to make those references appear or not... Does this page need to be updated as a result of these new features? - PaulT+/C 06:29, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

The feature is from February 2016. I have updated the page.[4] PrimeHunter (talk) 11:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Notice of RfC on single subsections

An issue related to single subsections, which watchers of this page may be interested in, is now up for discussion in an RfC which can be found at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC on single subsections. Feel free to come and participate. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Adding an anchor point to the TOC

Is there a way to add an anchor point (with defined text) which will be shown in the TOC, without actually creating a header? In other words, if I have a huge table, how do I link parts of the table in the TOC, without actually breaking the table into parts so as to accommodate section headings? Rehman 09:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but it's nasty and causes WP:ACCESSIBILITY problems so I'm not going to describe it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi User:Redrose64. The table in question is at Template:Infobox_power_station#Parameters. What I'm trying to improve is the ease of directly going to the subsections such as "Geothermal power stations", etc. So technically, contrary to what I said above, there are headings, but they are not necessarily wrapped with ==xx==. It is possible to include those headings in the table, such as "Geothermal power stations", in the TOC? Rehman 02:39, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Making anchors is easy, for instance with the row 
|-
| colspan="3" style="background-color:#FFFFE6;text-align:center;" | '''Lead section''' (used by all power station types)
you can add the attribute id="Parameters Lead section" either directly after the |- marker for the new row, or somewhere between the two pipes on the next line. Such anchors won't show in the TOC. You could make a pseudo-TOC, as has been done at Template:Convert/list of units (see Template:Convert#All units). Alternatively, you could mark them up as actual headings, see for example Template:Infobox settlement#Parameter names and descriptions - here, the orange-background rows like "Name and transliteration" are ===level 3 headings=== and they do show in the main TOC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks User:Redrose64. Making it lvl 3 or 4 seems like the best way. It generates a bit of extra space before the header, but it isn't too much of a problem. Cheers. Rehman 14:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2019

Change Owen Benjamin lives in Saranac Lake to Owen Benjamin lives in Washington State. 67.249.173.160 (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC) : Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Help:Section. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned.Please state the page the edit should be made on RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 21:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

@RhinosF1: This isn't a {{subst:ESp|xy}} situation, it's one for {{subst:ESp|mis}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Redrose64, I didn't see that in the options on edit protected helper RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 07:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 Changed RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 07:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Eh? It's there, and has been since it was added with the rest of the responses back in February 2014. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Reasons to use or not to use TOC

This help page doesn't explicitly state when __TOC__ should or shouldn't be used. It states that using __TOC__ can force the table of contents to appear if fewer than four sections appear. It states that __TOC__ can aid positioning the ToC. It states __TOC__ can cause accessibility problems (but it doesn't state how).

For example, is it correct, incorrect, or debatable to add __TOC__ when three or fewer lengthy sections exist on an article or talk page, to assist clarity of page content? Thank you, A145GI15I95 (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It intentionally does not lay down explicit rules because there are always going to be situations when a rigid rule is unsuitable. As for the accessibility problems, the actual phrase used at WP:TOC#Positioning the TOC is if there is any text at all between the TOC and the first heading, this will cause problems with accessibility, which is not at all the same as saying that __TOC__ can cause accessibility problems. In short, text between the TOC and the first heading is not read out by screen reader software, so it's as if it is completely hidden. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
What's included here is what we were able to reach consensus on in this recent discussion. Everything else is debatable. ~Kvng (talk) 13:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Sony crakel

I had a pyramid with a line could not watch show so I deleted it now I can't get it back Karen sweetnam (talk) 09:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Multiple Template:Compact ToC on the same page

This version of the List of blues musicians [5] was set up with a {{Compact ToC}} for each of the first two sections (tables with the necessary anchors). The first ToC works fine, but when a letter is clicked on the second ToC, it links to that letter in the first section table and not the second. I've removed them for now, but is it possible to direct the second ToCs to the second section table? —Ojorojo (talk) 19:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ojorojo: Anchors must be unique within a page. If the same anchor is used two or more times, only the first one is recognised. This is a fundamental feature of HTML (the {{anchor}} template makes an id= attribute, so see HTML 5.1 spec section 3.2.5.1. The id attribute) and is built into all modern web browsers, we cannot change that behaviour. All I can suggest is that you add some distinguishing characteristic, such as {{anchor|1940sA}}, {{anchor|1940sB}} or similar. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
I figured as much, but thanks for confirming it. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Will follow your advise always. Thanks boss Pankaj verma 23 (talk) 16:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hide/Show default parameters?

Is there a way to choose default state between Hide/Show?--౪ Santa ౪99° 19:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Bot requests § Fixing broken shortcuts to sections

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Bot requests § Fixing broken shortcuts to sections. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2020

List of Kappa Alpha Psi Brothers Football Jim Anderson 29 year NFL coach with the 

                           Cincinnati Bengals .
        Fritz Pollard Alliance Awardee 2605:A000:1315:E257:8803:FB45:C1F1:73FF (talk) 18:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm sorry what do you want edited? HeartGlow (talk) 19:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

mediawiki - Sections HTML code convertion problem

Greetings ... im havving a REALLY annoying problem. I have my wiki in a local server and in an server somewhere else.

The CSS are exacly the same BUT, on my local wiki the sections text are in blue (correct) and in the outside server are in black (wrong). even if i modify the main.css in the outside server in wont change to blue. if i apply any other stype, line background color, or underline, etc .. it will apply, but the color it refuses to change. i even tryied to use "!importante" and nothing (locally the the !import works just fine).

I looked into the generated page code to try to figure it out and this is that i found:

In my local server, the section generated code looks like this 

<h1>
	<span class="mw-headline" id="Overview"> Overview </span>
</h1>

In the other end ... on my external server the section generated code looks like this 

<h1>
	<span class="mw-headline" id="Overview">
		<a style="text-decoration:none;color:black" name="Overview"> Overview </a>
	</span>
</h1>

So.. i am almost sure that the problem is the style defined in the anchor. the question is .. why is that there??? i also found something interesting that may be a clue (for someone but not for me)

I found 2 wikis refering to "Help:Section"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Section
in this one (the one we are right now), they say that section work like in my local wiki
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Section
in this one it says that it works like on my external server


Is this any clue to anyone?

Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

- Miguel (17-02-2011 14:34) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.48.148.144 (talk) 14:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Linking to a second-level section from an edit to a different article

I tried for an hour to figure out how to link to Brown lemonade directly from an edit to a different article, and I can’t. BiliousBob (talk) 15:58, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@BiliousBob: Is this follow-up to User talk:BiliousBob#Linking to a second level section? If so, you should have linked to that; if not, which article does this concern? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

TOC not appearing in article mainspaces

I do not know why, but today, the Table of Contents on pages like Coca-Cola and Jupiter have just dissappeared. Why has this happened? Thanks. Realmaxxver (talk) 22:06, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

This was happening for me too on all articles but seems to have just been resolved. --Here2rewrite (talk) 22:43, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
@Realmaxxver and Here2rewrite: See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Missing TOC?. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

"Auto-number headings" preference

There is a "Numbering" section which says: "For registered users who use Preferences → Appearance → Auto-number headings, sections are numbered both in the table of contents and at the beginning of each section heading." When I look at my preferences I don't see this option for "Auto-number headings". Is this a feature that no longer exists? --netjeff (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I found the answer myself. According to meta:Help:Preferences#Advanced_options the "Auto-number headings" was removed in October 2021. I'm updating this help page to remove this setting. --netjeff (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Netjeff: We were warned, see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 190#Tech News: 2021-26, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 192#Tech News: 2021-41 and indeed Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 192#Section numbers gone. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering why other wikis have this but Wikipedia not. I found the answer: Because the other wikis use an earlier version of MediaWiki. I appreciate that a solid reasoning is provided for why it was removed, as well as a user script to retrofit the feature for those who wish to have it. :-) Yoshi the crocodile (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Looking for a mini-TOC for each of an article's sections

Hello, a long time ago I came across an article that I can't remember, and within it there was a smaller version of the TOC inside one section of the article. This smaller TOC only showed the subsections inside this one section; it didn't show anything outside of it, anything belonging to other sections. I would like to know what template it was, I've been looking for it since yesterday and can't seem to find it. Many thanks in advance! Snoteleks (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Snoteleks: There is no automatic way to do it as far as I know. I made {{Table TOC}} (undocumented}} which can make a horizontal TOC by manually writing the name of each link whether it's to a section or other anchor. The template name hints the main purpose of linking to anchors in long tables. Example with two sections here:
If the section names change then the code must be updated manually. If the section names are letters then {{Compact TOC}} can be used. {{TOCMonths}} works for months. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Why is the TOC automatically hidden if the page has less than 4 sections?

The TOC is currently hidden (or not even generated) for pages with less than 4 sections. Does anyone know why this is the case? I.e. what is the reasoning behind this decision?

A related question has come up on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T315862. In Vector 2022 should we show the TOC for pages with less than 4 sections (and if so, what about articles with 2 sections, or 1)? In order to help us evaluate this question I've updated our prototype to show the TOC regardless of how many sections are in the article. Here are three examples of the TOC being shown on articles with less than 4 sections (note there is an additional "Introduction" section which is automatically added to the TOC for all articles in Vector 2022):

3 sections
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Johnny_Miqueiro
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Hurkett
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Polycystine

2 sections
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Yusuke_Yachi
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Henning_Elbirk
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Norway_Ski_Club

1 section
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Rhytiphora_vicaria
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Hecyra_marmorata
https://di-collapsible-menus.web.app/Freedom_List AHollender (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, it has been this way since at least ~2003. The earliest reference I can easily find is in Wikipedia:Village pump/August 2003 archive 2#Table of contents.
I'm not sure why "4 or more" was chosen as the cutoff point. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I also don't know why 4 was chosen. It's hard coded and cannot be configured as far as I know. The TOC is not generated with less than 4 (unless __FORCETOC__ or __TOC__ is used), so there is no hidden TOC which can be unhidden with CSS or other methods. Except in Vector 2022, the TOC is by default shown right before the first heading so a TOC for one heading would be pointless. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
We picked 3 as in practice English Wikipedia content with three sections or fewer was very short at the time and we didn't want to waste user's screen space. I think it would be reasonable to re-visit this decision, but an awful lot of (mostly non-content) pages have been crafted assuming the current behaviour. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Four has been the only possibility for so long and there are so many MediaWiki wikis that I don't think a new value should be hard coded. The way to handle it today would be a configuration setting where Wikimedia wikis can make a Phab request to change the default, which should probably remain at four. I haven't found a feature request in Phab searches. A more fancy solution could give the number as a function of page size but it would probably just create confusion if TOC's come and go while most users don't even know the magic words to force or hide a TOC. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
One of the problems with not displaying the TOC, in case it is not clear from the above, is that if readers have the TOC pinned in a sidebar on the left side of the page, it creates a two-column (or three-column, with the new page tools sidebar) appearance. If the reader then clicks through to a page with only a couple of sections, the content suddenly jumps to the left, which is unsettling and undesirable. It would be helpful to have some sort of CSS or preference to say "Always show the table of contents, even if it's empty". – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Section title dispute

User:BurgeoningContracting disputes my renaming sections titled "People" to "People and fictional characters". This disagreement began at User:Clarityfiend#Carlton - People and is now here for third-party resolution, as we are deadlocked. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Section title dispute. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Configurability options for table of contents and Vector 2022 issues

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T317818

The issue of configurability options for table of contents is being tracked in Phabricator. Mathglot (talk) 06:35, 21 April 2023 (UTC)