Forum:SH:Table of Contents requested for Status Articles pages

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Advanced Jedi Training Droid 6 ^{(Talk to my master)} 03:43, June 16, 2014 (UTC)

---

The page containing the list of Good articles is getting quite large and unwieldy. I've had trouble navigating through it looking for something in particular, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I am convinced that it would benefit from a Table of Contents at the beginning of the page, just like in virtually every large Wookieepedia article in existence. It could simply outline the main headings, such as The Force, Individuals, Locations, Weapons and technology, etc. This could be applied to the list of Featured articles and Comprehensive articles also.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 17:26, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it is needed, but it is not a simple fix. The __NOTOC__ switch is currently transcluded to those pages via {{TabsTop}}, so removing the switch from that template would affect all of the 237 pages that use that template. In order of my preference, we will either need to find a workaround, set up a bot to add the switch to the other 234 pages, or manually create a TOC from scratch using basic wikitext. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:14, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

• How about something like modifying the __NOTOC__ line to {{#if:{{{Toc|}}}||__NOTOC__}} — then, on any of those {{TabsTop}} pages you want to include a TOC on, use {{TabsTop|Toc=1}}. - Esjs^(Talk) 22:05, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
  • I believe that the current TOC would not look effective on these pages due to the current layout. However, a hand-coded "inline" TOC that takes users to a subheading on clicking it would be feasible. Something like: [[Artifact]] - [[The arts]] - [[Droid models]] - Etc placed either above or below the intro text. - Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 22:10, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
    • Seconded. That'd look a lot better than the standard TOC. Cade Calrayn 22:11, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
    • Sounds good to me!--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 16:43, September 11, 2013 (UTC)
• Ok so I made a Table of Contents prototype. Do you like it? I was trying to put it in a colored box like the normal TOC's but I can't find the formatting code.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 23:54, September 21, 2013 (UTC)
  • Looks good. Supreme Emperor (talk) 12:50, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
    • That looks nothing like I suggested. An inline hand coded ToC would list the contents in a single line rather than a numbered list. The amount of whitespace to the right is just dead space. - Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 12:54, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

Artifacts– The arts–Droids–Events–The Force–Individuals–Locations–Organizations–Politics–Spacecraft–Species–Vehicles–Weapons and technology–Miscellaneous –Out of universe

That would be the way I would code it to eliminate dead space and be more in line with the style of the page. - Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 13:00, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

• I'm ok with either one. I'd like to know what the community thinks and prefers. Should I send this to the CT and get a vote?--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 15:36, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
  • I like the one line version, but you might also try a dot with empty spaces on both sides, instead of dashes. Like we have in many navigation templates.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 05:30, September 23, 2013 (UTC)
    • I agree with Dionne Jinn…

Artifacts · The arts · Droids · Events · The Force · Individuals · Locations · Organizations · Politics · Spacecraft · Species · Vehicles · Weapons and technology · Miscellaneous · Out of universe

The dot looks a whole lot better. Fe Nite (talk) 16:22, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

• Ok, I made the changes to "Contents 2" as suggested. Check it out.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 17:18, September 28, 2013 (UTC)
  • This was discussed at both the AC and the Inq meetings last night; see the log beginning around 23:27:13 (and the Inq log beginning 04:03:31). If the suggestions made there can be amended in your suggestion, I'm sure both panels will be happy to adapt it. Cheers, 1358 ^(Talk) 09:57, September 29, 2013 (UTC)
    • Sounds good! I think it would be great to have a border around the TOC and add a slightly different background color to distinguish it from the rest of the article. Unfortunately I don't know what the formatting codes are for this. Can someone help?--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 15:10, September 29, 2013 (UTC)
      • Yeah, how does this look:

^Fe Nite (talk) 19:55, September 29, 2013 (UTC)

• That looks really nice! I plugged it into my TOC Prototype article so people can see what it will look like.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 00:40, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

• I would recommend a lighter color. The darker color stands out too much, especially since there's text on top and below the toc (don't forget about the border). JangFett ^(Talk) 21:54, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

• I figured someone would say it was too dark. The lighter color is fine but then it probably does need a border and I am not sure how to create a border with the {{Rt}} and {{Rb}} templates (it may not be possible). So, to add a border you would lose the rounded edges. Therefore, I think a good compromise would be to make it a little bit darker. Fe Nite (talk) 16:53, October 1, 2013 (UTC)

• Stylistically, it blends in more. The idea is not make the toc stand out too much. The darker the color, the more distracting the box will be. You can gradually darken the color, if you prefer, but I used a color that is present on the Wook. I.e, {{Shtop}} and the category box. JangFett ^(Talk) 20:21, October 1, 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah you're right. It looks good. It would be hard to darken it anyways because a new entry (or whatever they're called) would have to be added to MediaWiki:Common.css to allow the change of color. Basically the only two colors that could currently be used is the one from {{Forumtable}} (the one I used) or {{Shtop}} (the one you used). Fe Nite (talk) 20:47, October 1, 2013 (UTC)
• Ok so I plugged the latest version into the Table of Contents prototype. Let me know what you think so we can implement this soon.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 21:04, October 1, 2013 (UTC)

• Looks good. I'm for it. Let's see what others think. Fe Nite (talk) 15:01, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

• Looks good to me. 1358 ^(Talk) 13:23, October 4, 2013 (UTC)

• Nice. Supreme Emperor (talk) 03:29, October 5, 2013 (UTC)

• Very pretty!--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 05:10, October 5, 2013 (UTC)

• Aye. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 19:29, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

• Looks good. CC7567 ^(talk) 00:50, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

• Very nice. Looks how I pictured it. - Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 22:40, October 14, 2013 (UTC)

Moving on: we'll probably approve this TOC at the following reviewing panel meetings (AC meeting on the 26th and Inqmoot yet to be scheduled, probably Nov 2). I do realize that this is a bit bureaucratic, but there's no real hurry for the TOC so we might as well get it formally approved. 1358 ^(Talk) 13:42, October 15, 2013 (UTC)

• I'm looking forward to it. I'm tired of constantly having to scroll all the way down the article to try to find "Weapons and technology". A single-click on a TOC would be perfect. It will also be nice for new users (and others) to easily find status articles by type. --Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 19:31, October 15, 2013 (UTC)
• Did this every get approved or was it forgotten about? Fe Nite (talk) 18:46, November 14, 2013 (UTC)
  • It was never brought up at the October 26 AC meeting, and there hasn't been an Inqmoot since September 28. —MJ— ^Holocomm 03:09, November 15, 2013 (UTC)
• Is this ever going to be implemented?--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 17:42, February 1, 2014 (UTC)
  • We're very good at forgetting things, and we're no more likely to remember this for the next meetings that we have. I would suggest paying attention to when the next Inqmoot and AC meetings are scheduled and adding a note to those pages requesting us to do this. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:40, February 1, 2014 (UTC)
    • How can I know when the next Inqmoot and AC meetings are scheduled?--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 23:45, February 4, 2014 (UTC)
      • If you monitor Wookieepedia:Inquisitorius and Wookieepedia:AgriCorps, the new meeting pages will appear in the meeting pages forum section once created. The next AC meeting will be number 65; the Inq 61. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:00, February 5, 2014 (UTC)
        • I clicked on "Follow" for those two pages. I'm not sure if that will work and make the new meetings appear on my Watchlist though.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 16:53, February 8, 2014 (UTC)
          • It won't work that way. You'll just need to check the pages manually. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 16:56, February 8, 2014 (UTC)
            • Oh ok. Thanks.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 03:55, February 9, 2014 (UTC)
• Yay, finally! The TOC looks great and works wonderfully. "And the people rejoiced...." --Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 17:46, March 4, 2014 (UTC)
  • Suffice to say, good work, sir. Winterz (talk) 03:08, March 8, 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks. I initiated it, but it was the team that pulled it off.--Richterbelmont10 ^{(come in R2!)} 19:06, March 20, 2014 (UTC)