As expected, any attempt at removing the grey-colored border around thumbnail images breaks the layout in IE, and this will continue to be the case until we get a skin that is not a hack of a black-on-white Monobook. It would probably be best to change the bg color of that table element to #222222 - I personally believe that these pages should follow most of MA's "look&feel" anyway - not that different colors should be ruled out completely, but I'm not sure if we need a completely color-coded page, either... :) -- Cid Highwind 14:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
...or: "I can't see shit!" ;)
No really, these scrollable div elements are bad enough when they are as wide as the page allows - in a sidebar which is about 200-250px wide on most screens, they are absolutely horrible. Even more so considering that there's the equivalent of just 4 lines of text left per section, with individual items sometimes taking up 2 of those lines alone. I'd rather see the more esoteric lists/categories replaced with a link to the list category that contains them - not every category needs to be listed here, IMO. -- Cid Highwind 16:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hope this helps...
- :) -- Captain M.K.B.
Absolutely. :) -- Cid Highwind 16:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Couldn't have said it better myself :P - Enzo Aquarius 16:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- I have absolutely no problem with reverting the page... it was an experiment, and if everyone hates it, so be it. :P I just had a concern that the right-hand column was growing quite long, and would probably grow a lot longer over time. -- Renegade54 16:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Less... vertical? Edit
- It's great! --Bp 09:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, so thats not a very useful response. Go ahead with it, although I've recently come to a new idea about what the portals should be. You can kindof see it at the Portal:Star Trek. Anyway, I'm on IRC at the moment if you want to talk about it. --Bp 09:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and by "Go ahead with it", I dont mean you need permission or anything, Sir. I just mean that no one is really working on it, so I dont think anyone would be pissed if you work on it where it is, rather than on a sub-page or something. --Bp 09:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Featured Person Edit
How about having Majel Barrett-Roddenberry as the featured person? Lt.Lovett 22:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)