Template talk:MaintenanceLinks

Hiding empty blocks

I had the idea that, if a category has zero pages in it, its cell in this table can be hidden. It would place more focus on the categories that have members and reduce the width of the template, but might also be confusing to see the number of cells changing for a possibly unclear reason. Toomai Glittershine The Dispenser 14:28, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

I think it's better to hide the figure when there's nothing to do, removing the figure below the links can be something to work towards. Toast ltimatum 14:34, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

Support. This is a great idea! If there's nothing to do, why note it in the template? DarkFox01, ETC. 17:10, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

Support. Miles (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

Support:Who needs zeroes? ShupaRoeh 19:39, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

The section-stub template

Should I add the section-stub template to the template under stubs, the way smasher-stubs are? DarkFox01: 3...2...1... 12:51, 30 December 2012 (EST)

Well first the target category must be correctly created. Toomai Glittershine The Incomprehensible 13:21, 30 December 2012 (EST)

Category created and template updated! DarkFox01: 3...2...1... 14:01, 30 December 2012 (EST)

Separating Smasher Stubs

They count as something like 75% of stubs at this point, so would it make sense to have it shown separately from regular and/or competitive stubs? Having <1000 stubs listed feels a bit misleading when the category it links to only has less than 200 entries. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 08:07, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

Eh I dunno. They're still all stubs; splitting them in this template wouldn't do much except take up more space. Toomai Glittershine The Incomperable 09:39, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

The thing is, smasher and mainspace articles concern very different matters and as such require different kinds of knowledge. Plus, as I feel mainspace is (arguably) more "objectively" relevant, I too think seeing that 1000+ is misleading with regard to the wiki's status. -Menshay (talk) 05:56, 18 September 2015 (EDT)

Draft rewrite

I have a rewrite ready at User:Rigel Kent/MaintenanceLinks draft, viewable at User:Rigel Kent/MaintenanceLinks tests.

The main change is the flow of content. Left-to-right lists with CSS padding, rather than tables with top icons before bottom numbers and spacer cells. Keeping each icon adjacent to its corresponding number simplifies the parser logic, and makes it easier to move icons around, if needed.

If anyone would like to double-check it's working correctly, this is what should be happening:

• In all browsers, if a section is empty, it outputs nothing, rather than an extra wide gap (which is actually a bandwidth-hogging blank table containing spacer cells).
• In IE8, the borders appear correctly.
• In IE9+ and current desktop browsers, there are no significant visual changes.
• In mobile browsers, the icons are spaced apart a bit more, and shrink less when a list hits the full screen width.

If anything looks off, please let me know. I don't want to copy the draft over unless it works for everyone.

One last thing: since this shows up on the main page and on Special:RecentChanges, bandwidth could be important. The load can be reduced by splitting the styles (some applicable to desktop only, some to mobile only) into the skin-specific CSS files. I'll be happy to write the CSS, if admins would prefer that. ライケン Rigel Kent (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2016 (EDT)