Template:Collapse/testcases
 | This is the template test cases page for the sandbox of Template:Collapse. to update the examples. If there are many examples of a complicated template, later ones may break due to limits in MediaWiki; see the HTML comment "NewPP limit report" in the rendered page. You can also use Special:ExpandTemplates to examine the results of template uses. You can test how this page looks in the different skins with these links: |
| Extended content |
|---|
|
{{{1}}}
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|expand=yes}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|left=yes}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|border=8px|b-color=red}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|bg1=blue|padding=20px}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| {{Collapse/sandbox|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|bg=black|fc=white}} |
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
| Nested templates | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
Extended content
|
|---|
|
{{{1}}}
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|expand=yes}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|left=yes}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|border=8px|b-color=red}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|bg1=blue|padding=20px}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
{{Collapse|1=Discussion text to be put into box.|2=|bg=black|fc=white}}
|
|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
Nested templates
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Discussion text to be put into box.
|
Problem from jimbo's talkpage
changeAt least as great a problem is that perceptions of bias have changed radically. If reporting is factually accurate in the traditional sense of the words "factual" and "accurate," but presents information that the reader would rather not see, nowadays it's likely to be called biased or fake. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
- SBHB, how true! Objective facts are now called "fake news":
"FOX News and the planetary system of right-wing news sites that would orbit it and, later, Breitbart, were particularly adept at weaponizing such arguments and exploiting the increasingly partisan fervor animating the Republican base: They accused the media establishment of “liberal bias,” and substituted their own right-wing views as “fair and balanced” – a redefinition of terms that was a harbinger of Trump’s hijacking of “fake news” to refer not to alt-right conspiracy theories and Russian troll posts, but to real news that he perceived as inconvenient or a threat to himself."[1]
- This is our new world, and our job as Wikipedians and citizens is to not surrender, but insist that RS are our standard. The MSM is not fake news. It is not the "enemy of the people".[2] If we cave, Wikipedia will be whitewashed, undermined, and fail to be an objective documentation of history and knowledge. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 04:47, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Foo
- ↑ Woods, Sean (June 20, 2018). "Michiko Kakutani on Her Essential New Book 'The Death of Truth'". Rolling Stone. Retrieved July 23, 2018.
- ↑ Pak, Nataly; Seyler, Matt (July 19, 2018). "Trump derides news media as 'enemy of the people' over Putin summit coverage". ABC News. Retrieved July 23, 2018.
Gosh
|
Bar
┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Some of the U.S. mainstream media is fake news (or fake-ish) along with their "happy-talk" opinions, as people worry to refer to FOX News as "Faux news" or other news groups repeat gossip and "let the reader decide". Some users above have warned how "news sells" and how it can be sold more, aka "yellow journalism" (sensationalism in news reports). In the U.S. it certainly appears how when a news group has a choice between "new" or "true" then they seem to run with "new" and claim they only repeat the news. If the news repeats "crooked Hillary" 999x, then there are many people who would just believe it, because the news "forgot" to report she was found to be honest and truthful after years of investigation. The news groups had the optional opinion to refute the lie of "crooked" but they opined not to refute, about 999x times. -Wikid77 (talk) 08:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)