This Forum has been archivedVisit the new Forums
Here's my latest kludgey implantation (:D), that gave me an extra 117 pixels of width.
Since we are not allowed to change the real width of the wiki, I changed the perceived width by adding a wider background image, and used relative positioning for the content.
It's designed for 1280 resolution, so people that use less will have to scroll a bit. There shouldn't be many of them, and the scrolling is not really different from the stupid pop-up button that wikia gave us to cover their inability to provide what we really need, forcing us to do weird things like this.
- I'm afraid that even though it's not a direct width change it still might be considered a violation of the rules. After all the result is the same - content space is wider than 1000px. Sovq 19:28, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
- These things are in the FAQs, but they pretty much all have statements about not being applied wiki-wide. Personally, I don't care, but if you see some morning a Wikia staff member has reverted a bunch of your changes, don't be surprised. -- (talk · contr) 11 Mar 2011 5:59 PM Pacific
- See also: Forum: Need flexible width up to a wider fixed width. --Timeshifter 21:53, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm still for shrinking the rail, although Sannse did enlighten me as to why they won't do that - the ads go in the rail, and as such have to be the width of the rail. All of their ad providers have 300px ads; if you shrink the rail, the ads don't fit anymore. Unfortunately, she didn't think it would make sense to give logged in users a smaller rail, because they didn't want to develop everything twice. I personally disagree (I could make the rail 200px with an hour of tinkering with CSS), but that's their reason. The verdict is still out on why Wikia thinks fixed width is better than flexible width.
- Fixed width is fine if it is wide enough. The problem is that it is too narrow. Forum:Wikia and Wikipedia problems with gaming points out that Wikia made the fixed width wider for WoWwiki. The problem is that they made it too wide for some users like me that use a 17-inch CRT monitor set to 1152x864 resolution. The solution is at Forum: Need flexible width up to a wider fixed width. It sets a width that varies between 1000 and 1200 pixels wide. It adjusts to your screen resolution. Simple, and effective. Maybe call it a fixed-width range. --Timeshifter 18:06, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid your implementation isn't working right (at least in smaller resolutions). What is happening is that the extra 117 pixels are being added to the left of the screen and no scroll bar is created by the browser (I used firefox). This makes the fist pixels on that page not visible.
- Well, that sucks :( Thanks for letting me know. I'll see if I can make it scroll, otherwise might as well use the stupid pop-up button... --IK Talk 22:24, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
- You can disable those with CSS. They're really quite annoying. I've actually noticed that most people made their tables fit in the outrageously small content space specifically to avoid those buttons. Lesser of two evils, I guess.
- I went back to the piece of s*** buttons...
- Did you notice that the pop-up thing does not use the default font properties? You have to specifically set font-size, font-weight and text color in the table style...