Consider the following Minimum Working Example (MWE):



    This is a sample text to visualize the behavior of useful package nowidow. It clearly shows that only one line visible on the previous page is prevented (what is called the effect of Hurenkind). If there is only one line on the next page, this effect is called Schusterjunge. I hope one can understand the undesired behavior of both typesetting effects. Blabla blub test bla blub bla bla bla and some more blabla to cause LaTeX to produce some Hurenkind.


Screenshot of the result:

Screenshot of the result

As you can see, the package nowidow prevents the appearance of an ugly single line on the second page. Also it does prevent appearance of one single line on the first page before pagebreak.

The question:

Some similar protective behavior could be caused by setting

\clubpenalty = 10000
\widowpenalty = 10000
\displaywidowpenalty = 10000

in the preamble. What are the advantages of using package nowidow over using these single commands (or vice versa)?


There is a difference.

With the package option defaultlines=<number>, you can set the number of lines that should be kept together; so, with


at least three lines will be moved to the next page.

You can get the same effect by loading the package without options and issuing


By default the package doesn't act on club lines. You can use


if you prefer to keep at least three lines before a page break.

The package also provides for \nowidow[<number>] to be used at the end of a paragraph in order to locally force <number> lines after the page break. Similarly for \noclub.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.