Template talk:Sqrt

Why not use this template

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive 14#New template Jɪmp 02:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's an alternative.

<math>\scriptstyle\sqrt{ Enter your number here. }</math>

JIMp _talk·cont 01:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Bad, bad, bad. Never abuse scriptstyle outside of sub/pscripts like this, it brings in a load of typographic problems.—Emil J. 11:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Which looks better, $\scriptstyle {\sqrt {2}}$ or √2? JIMp _talk·cont 04:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The use of \scriptstyle may sometimes cause problems with spacing/fontsizes. For example: $\scriptstyle {\sqrt {2+2}}=2$ (compare to without scriptstyle: ${\sqrt {2+2}}=2$, the plus and equal sign are spaced). Of course spacing can be adjusted manually, but the advantage of √2 + 2 = 2 is that it reduced the loading time of the page, which becomes important for slower internet connections; and also scales better with different font sizes.  // stpasha »  08:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Is there any way to get the √ and the    to link up? JIMp _talk·cont 10:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Now what would really be nice

... would be a template which gave you the square root of a number. Note: The Wiki software doesn't support the operator ^ thus {{#expr:{{{number}}}^0.5}} won't work. Pretty damn hopeless but that's the way it is. Jɪmp 02:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, both wishes have come true: {{sqrt}} (where this once was) gives the square root of a number & the Wiki software now does it too. JIMp _talk·cont 01:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Still in use?

Does anybody even use this template? I'd rather it was replaced by {{sqrt|n}} producing √n

The above comment is from Stpasha at 19:18, 3 November 2010.

• √n vs √n

• √2 vs √2

• √12 vs √12

• √276 vs √276

• √2 vs √2

• √1⁄n vs √1⁄n

• √10¹⁰⁰ vs √10¹⁰⁰

• √numb vs √numb

It is better. JIMp _talk·cont 11:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

... mostly better ... the template's used on one article and on one talk page. JIMp _talk·cont 11:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

what does √{{{1}}} doing in top

Delete this extraneous heading which may confuse users. unsigned comment by‎ 117.198.16.148 at 5:14 am GMT on 7 April 2013

Done (not actually a heading but, anyway it's gone). JIMp _talk·cont 08:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Undone. Others like to see the raw output of a template. — Edokter (talk) — 09:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Who? JIMp _talk·cont 09:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Me, for one. And there a good reason why: previewing live templates is impossible when they are hidden. It's OK when there is a sandbox, but a sandbox is not helpfull for templates this small. — Edokter (talk) — 21:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you for one, obviously, but you promised "others". I'm not sure what's wrong here: we've got an example of what the thing does in the documentation, how is this inadequate? JIMp _talk·cont 11:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Showing the result of the template is the standard and expected behaviour for other templates, as well as Mediawiki default without further code trickery. I see no reason why this template should be treated differently.—Emil J. 14:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Me too. Although preview consideration are now not so important as a year ago, anyway I detest templates which do not show even the simple test case, under the ordinary preview. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Template: Conjugate created as an alternative to buggy {{overline}}

I announced it at WP: Village pump (technical) ‎#Template: Conjugate, but no reaction ensued. I am not sure that it is much prettier than {{overline}}, but apparently it is not worse. If nobody objects, then I would port this style to {{sqrt}} and {{radic}} to make feasible their use under {{math}}, {{sfrac}}, interval templates, and other similar ones. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Whoops… why did I not notice a reply? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)