Forums: Index > Projects > Cluster tables redesign

The form below serves as a tool to describe the project. The form is intended to be as specific as possible to what the project is to accomplish.

  • Please place all comments under the Comments heading.
  • If there is a discussion page linked, then be sure to check it out as well.
  • Also please do not create any articles unless all the details have been worked out, or at least the majority of them.
  • Once the article/project has been created/finished, please put a mention that the article/project is completed and provide a redirect to the relevant article/s and talk page/s.

If any new things come up after the project proposal's passing, then please shift the discussion to the relevant article talk page/s.

If you have any questions on how to fill out the form, or any other question, please refer to the Project Forum talk page.

Project: Cluster table redesign

Redesigning the cluster tables are
Currently developed by: Teugene
Developer(s) notes:
Status last updated:

Page location: User:Teugene/Sandbox/Cluster_Template_Prototype
Page should contain:
Supporting links or images:
Discussion on:

Other Notes

Since Wikia's new skin was implemented, the clusters page was left looking very messy and disordered, partially because of Wikia's table wrapper which is inserted when tables exceeds the fixed column width. I propose to fix this by redesigning two new table layout which will be fixed width to prevent the table wrapper.

Please note two things:

I included a second option under each prototype, which is without the cluster name in the table. I felt keeping the cluster name in the table is redundant as each table will be under it's own respective cluster header anyway.

Also, this draft is built without a template. I do not have the prototype templates in place as I do not have as much time nor the extensive knowledge to build it. I'd rather build this in HTML first, and work on the template after the design is confirmed to save time. I will require assistance in this area if this find approval with the community.

So please give your comments, cents, and constructive criticism. — Teugene (Talk) 18:06, July 11, 2011 (UTC)

Voting Edit

Voting has concluded. The proposal passes and Prototype 1 is approved 2-0. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:22, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

Please refer to preview page through link above

Prototype 1 Edit

  1. Support. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:13, August 9, 2011 (UTC)
  2. I like this one. Lancer1289 19:22, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Prototype 2 Edit

Comments Edit

I can say that I do prefer some elements of this, and some elements of the current system, I still prefer the current system over this as it stands currently. We do have templates in use on the cluster templates to handle things like this, and they do a good job of handling the code and spacing things out. I do like putting the name of the cluster on top, then the system, then the planet underneath it, but I'd rather keep the templates that are currently in use, rather than just completely replacing it with a lot of code in the template itself, which in turn makes it hard to add things. The current system works quite well, and if this is what is going to replace it, I can't say I'm very supportive. The formatting is nice in comparison, as it would no doubt help with display, but I can't see a reason for abandoning templates that work, are simple to use, and work quite nicely. I think we should work on fixing the display of the templates to match either one with the cluster name, but I personally think we can do without the bullets in this instance as it just doesn't look right to me. Lancer1289 18:17, July 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure I mentioned above that the proposed design is built in HTML first because I don't have the time to do so in template form. I do not want to spend time working on draft template only to modify it over again. Only after the design is confirmed, the actual template will be worked on, but like I said, I will require assistance in that part. I'm also aware that the template is also reused in each respective cluster article but it wouldn't matter if the template is redesigned. As for the bullets for separator, I tried dash, bullets and others but I kinda like the bullets the best. Do you have any alternative suggestion for a separator? — Teugene (Talk) 18:27, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
(Addendum) Apparently I deleted parts of the sentence without realizing it. Nevertheless, I thought got the point across without it but let me clarify it again. — Teugene (Talk) 18:26, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict)I really think in this case the templates can survive without them as any separator, apart from the one from the dash separating system from planets, just doesn’t look right to me. At least between the planets. The dash between the system and planets I can see, but not dashes or bullets between the planets. As to the actual redesign, thanks for the clarification about replacement, I personally like #1 a bit more than #2 as it looks more natural to me, but in all honesty, I can tolerate either one. Just without the bullets between planets. Lancer1289 18:32, July 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think everyone can agree that the current tables are quite bad and must go. I think Teugene's effort to that end is great! I prefer design #2 (with cluster name), but unlike Lancer I think the bullets look great. Kudos!

On implementation with the templates: I think it should be simple enough to do in-place (that is, make the changes to the templates only, leaving each cluster page unedited), since they're already pretty well structured. I haven't looked too much at the code, but I believe it should be quite flexible. -- Dammej (talk) 00:07, July 12, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all the comments so far! Maybe I should message a few more people to draw attention to this project. Dammej, I actually had you in mind to help on the implementation since you are well-versed in template codes :D — Teugene (Talk) 06:49, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
I like the first design - overall it looks better then what we currently have. I would also suggest that we don't use the templates structure that is currently in use (almost impossible to debug or make changes). --silverstrike 12:14, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
I prefer the templates with the labels on them... it just makes things easier to organize. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 18:15, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

Throw my hat in for the first prototype, with the cluster labels. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:21, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

I prefer the first prototype with labels as well. The dashes in the second prototype just don't work for me, aesthetically speaking. SpartHawg948 21:00, July 14, 2011 (UTC)
Not to mention the second prototype feels incomplete without a label. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 21:38, July 14, 2011 (UTC)
I like prototype 2 with cluster labels the best, though these are all great. Arbington 21:58, July 14, 2011 (UTC)
Fist Prototype with labels.--Legionwrex 22:05, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

Time to open voting? Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 22:14, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, when will the voting start? It's been a while since this was proposed. Arbington 05:09, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
Many apologies guys. Work has caught up recently and in the same time I'm in the midst of preparing for my wedding hence affecting my activity here. I'll open up the voting but will need the community to implement the new layout after. Any takers? — Teugene (Talk) 09:02, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting married! W00T! (and that's the last time I use leet-speak)
Now, regarding implementation: I'll be happy to do it. --silverstrike 15:34, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the wishes and for taking up the implementation! :D Now... let's get the votes in! :) — Teugene (Talk) 05:16, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.