Talk:CSS framework

Computing: Software / Websites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Websites (assessed as Mid-importance).

JavaScript Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject JavaScript, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to JavaScript, and to the development of user scripts for use on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JavaScriptWikipedia:WikiProject JavaScriptTemplate:WikiProject JavaScriptJavaScript articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

On 11 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to CSS Framework. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Rename front End frameworks[edit]

Hi folks,

most of these frameworks offer not only css, but also js plugins. Lets rename it in front end frameworks (following)...? 15:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

oppose - that's an article, but it's not this article. If we have content for CSS frameworks, then let's have that as an article and, if necessary, root out entries that fall outside it. CSS on its own is something that can support a presentational framework. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Throwing in “web frameworks” or “HTML/CSS frameworks”.—j9t (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andy,

I see your point. But mostly all the well known like Bootstrap or Foundation use JS. Also the big ones provide many features (slideshows, iconfonts, etc) and the smaller ones provide only a grid. I would not know how to seperate all these diffrent "things", CSS frameworks, only Grids, full front end frameworks etc. So, one article with all these frameworks would give you a good overview over all possibilities for web design. VanGore (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andy,

I thought about it. Now I think CSS frameworks is the right term. JS usage is mostly additional, but the main parts (grid etc) are css. So I added this to the article. thx & greetz VanGore (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of CSS frameworks twice[edit]

Hi folks,

the List of CSS frameworks and the tables Grid systems and Grid generators are doublicate. Can I merge the list into the table? VanGore (talk) 09:31, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. That would imply that CSS is only useful for grid-based layouts, which is very much untrue and would be a serious POV bias. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andy,

of course we have to rename the table heading or create an extra table "grid less". But atm we have so many doublicates (960 grid system, Blueprint, Bluesky grid system, Bootstrap, Cardinal Framework...) VanGore (talk) 16:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

gridsystemgenerator.com[edit]

The site does not exist. Has it got deleted or moved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.120.10.114 (talk) 09:51, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scope[edit]

Biased: The article could be stronger if it was covering all web frameworks (HTML/CSS/JS)—I don’t think we’d need different articles for them, and a table as with grid systems may do quite fine—; furthermore the article could benefit from differentiation (internal vs. external frameworks), use cases (experimentation, corporate sites), as well as criticism (lack of tailoring).—j9t (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Missing BULMA[edit]

It's missing BULMA, by far the most popular CSS Framework

Maintenance and rating of JavaScript articles[edit]

Concerning editing and maintaining JavaScript-related articles...

Collaboration...[edit]

If you are interested in collaborating on JavaScript articles or would like to see where you could help, stop by Wikipedia:WikiProject JavaScript and feel free to add your name to the participants list. Both editors and programmers are welcome.

Where to list JavaScript articles[edit]

We've found over 300 JavaScript-related articles so far. If you come across any others, please add them to that list.

User scripts[edit]

The WikiProject is also taking on the organization of the Wikipedia community's user script support pages. If you are interested in helping to organize information on the user scripts (or are curious about what we are up to), let us know!

If you have need for a user script that does not yet exist, or you have a cool idea for a user script or gadget, you can post it at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests. And if you are a JavaScript programmer, that's a great place to find tasks if you are bored.

How to report JavaScript articles in need of attention[edit]

If you come across a JavaScript article desperately in need of editor attention, and it's beyond your ability to handle, you can add it to our list of JavaScript-related articles that need attention.

Rating JavaScript articles[edit]

At the top of the talk page of most every JavaScript-related article is a WikiProject JavaScript template where you can record the quality class and importance of the article. Doing so will help the community track the stage of completion and watch the highest priority articles more closely.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:07, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

wellcomecss is nonexistent/not notable as of writing[edit]

the edit from july 2018 that added it looks like a plug from a random ip for a guy's framework which isn't even accessible as of writing. dunno if it's "notable" enough to be on this list.

Requested move 11 June 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 09:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CSS framework → CSS Framework – Proper capitalization 180.251.158.238 (talk) 09:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC) 180.251.158.238 (talk) 09:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:NCCAPS. Proposed name is not a proper name but is used in the most generic and inclusive sense in the article. Johnnie Bob (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Johnnie Bob. Rublov (talk) 14:50, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "CSS framework" is not a specific product but instead a generic term. JIP | Talk 10:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

List of notable CSS frameworks[edit]

Enough with adding non-notable examples to this list! To be considered for inclusion in a list of "notable X", each entry must (normally) be evidenced by the existence of its own Wikipedia article, but as a bare minimum, it must independently demonstrate notability using the criteria of WP:GNG. That means it must have received "... significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources ...". Listing the product's webpage or its github page is definitely NOT sufficient, since these are not WP:INDEPENDENT of the product and it's creators.

To make things simple, I propose that this article should begin enforcing the criterion of representative entries having their own existing (not red-linked) Wikipedia article, since this is how most embedded "lists of notable X" work in Wikipedia. That means that this criterion must be spelled out in words in the introductory text to the list. Discussion? — Johnnie Bob (talk) 14:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]