Template talk:CompactTOC2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Template:CompactTOC2 is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template.
Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases. |
Contents |
[edit] TOC suppression failing
Resolved. Bug fixed, though it did not have anything to do with NOTOC being on line by itself.There is a problem with the coding of the TOC. It is not suppressing the normal TOC even though the "__NOTOC__" is present. My guess is that it needs to appear on its own line outside the table to work correctly. Mike 01:49, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Hrmmm... a table?
Resolved. Formatting long-since established and made consistent between this entire family of templates.Boo to improper table usage! :p ¦ Reisio 01:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] If anyone's watching ...
Resolved. As of June 2007, #top works just fine.I've tried to activate the "top" link. It seems to work, but I'm not sure it's the most efficient method. User:Noisy | Talk 11:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- What's wrong with using [[#top|Top]]? —Mike 19:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Because there is no "Top" section name in any article. Is "Top" supposed to be a reserved word, because if so, it doesn't seem to work? User:Noisy | Talk 02:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Every rendered page has a hidden <a name="top" id="top"></a> above the sitenotice. That is was #top is going to take you to. Find a very long list which has the compactTOC mid-way or at the bottom. The top link will take you to the, well, top. -- Netoholic @ 04:50, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, that solution doesn't work, so I've set it back to mine, which does. User:Noisy | Talk 05:17, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
OK, then you're the only one in months of this implementation to complain. How about you give some details rather than breaking it for the rest of us. What browser/OS are you using? What mediawiki skin? Any customizations? -- Netoholic @ 05:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- Have you actually tried it? It doesn't work on the Template page because {{PAGENAME}} doesn't deliver the 'Template:' part, so it looks red and appears as an edit link in the Template space only. Please test before reverting! If you can deliver another solution that works – because the original solution doesn't seem to work for Firefox under XP with Classic skin and no customization – then I'll accept that. User:Noisy | Talk 11:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- Textile manufacturing terminology is the page that didn't work. User:Noisy | Talk 11:10, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Yep, I confirmed that it is not working on Firefox using Classic skin. It works on IE with Classic and it works with Firefox using Monobook. I'd report this bug to the Firefox developers. It isn't strictly a skin problem, since the page source has the correct #top anchor. Firefox just doesn't want to jump to it.
- All that said, it is best to leave it as my version. Your version cause the entire page to reload. How about we not do something to strain the servers just because .5% of readers have an issue with that one tiny link. I know the devs have complained about the lack of attention the non-Monobook skins have, and are even planning on removing a couple. Keep in mind that Monobook is the default the vast majority of readers see the site as, so developing/editing will always be concentrated on that skin. -- Netoholic @ 12:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
How can I put this: the old version doesn't work! Please come up with another solution if mine is wrong, but on Textile manufacturing terminology clinking top just takes you to the top of the screen, not the top of the article! It seems to be a problem if the quickbar is floating, because the "<a name="top" id="top"></a> above the sitenotice" takes you to the top of the quickbar. MS IE seems to be broken for me, because the quickbar isn't floating when I tried it. I've installed all MS XP updates, so I don't think my s/w is out-of-date. Please come up with some other solution that works for floating quickbars!!!! User:Noisy | Talk 12:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Then why are they an option in preferences, with a preferences page all to themselves? They work perfectly for me in Firefox: no fix is required. Your argument actually supports my contention that it's a problem with the template using #top, when top doesn't refer to the article frame! When quickbars are eventually supported, the current solution will become ineffective! Is there anything similar to the 'section=0' – used for editing the section at the top of the article – that could be used instead? User:Noisy | Talk 13:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- To get it to work in other namespaces, {{NAMESPACE}}: needs to be added before the {{PAGENAME}} bit. Is that what was causing it to fail on other pages? User:Noisy | Talk 12:37, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Categorization
Resolved. Template now categorized.Can the administrator gods put this in the end of the code: <noinclude>[[:Category:TOC templates]]</noinclude> Category:TOC templates —Mark Adler (markles) 22:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requested change to category sort order
Resolved. Category sorting fixed.Please change the category from [[Category:TOC templates]] to [[category:TOC templates|{{PAGENAME}}]] so that it sorts properly. Thank you! — Saxifrage ✎ 11:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] # instead of 0-9
Resolved. Proposal ignored for 5 months; alt. template provides flexible solution for articles that need it.Can the # symbol be used instead of 0-9? Some lists have entries starting with symbols. Ceros 03:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
| Contents: | Top - # A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
|---|
- I agree that the 0-9 section is often inadequate, unnecessarily restrictive, and needs to be replaced with a Symbols section when this template is upgraded. But why not call a spade a spade? My proposal - simply call it Symbols:
- —Tokek 08:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
See Template:CompactTOC8 for a flexible solution. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] See also
Resolved. Edit completed.{{editprotected}} Please add:
==See also== *[[Template:CompactTOC8]] for a more full-featured version with many options.
before category, and one of the protected page templates (even the little top-right lock icon version would be fine.) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sankyu beddy mush <bow>. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] TfD merge nomination
{{Editprotected}} Please change:
__NOTOC__
to:
__NOTOC__<!--BEGIN TFD--><br />{{tfd-inline|{{subst:PAGENAME}}}}<!--END TFD-->
— SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Done. --- RockMFR 20:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- What was the result of the nomination? I can't find the discussion, there is no link on this page to the old discussion, and the "deletion notice" is still there. Sloppy. Carcharoth (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Here we go: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 27#CompactTOCs merge and rename. Could someone put an oldtfd notice (if such exists) above, and remove the "deletion notice" from the template? Carcharoth (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Please remove the TfD code from the template (just revert to version before it was added). The TfD is now closed. PS: No oldtfd note need be added (I don't know if such exists either) because this template is due to be replaced. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 07:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Invisible on Opera
The template is not visible on Opera—as if it were not even there. Can this be confirmed, and if so, can someone sic the CSS folks on it? —Marco Polo 21:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
