This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Categories This template is within the scope of WikiProject Categories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of categories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CategoriesWikipedia:WikiProject CategoriesTemplate:WikiProject CategoriesCategories articles

I just copied this template (and the ones it uses Template:LargeCategoryTOC/a-z and Template:Navigation bar) for use on http://filkipedia.chaoscircle.com , an index of filk songs. Thanks for it! JesseW, the juggling janitor 19:17, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

When should this template be used, in other words roughly how many pages would constitute a large category? Thanks. -- Jameboy ( talk) 18:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC) reply

There is no discussion here to change the parameter from a-z to aejot. Was there a Tfd session? The change makes it more difficult to get to the articles in Category:Biography articles without listas parameter that have diacritics in the first or second position. I was sorely tempted to undo the change but I did not want to upset anyone. JimCubb ( talk) 21:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Jim. I answered you on my Talk page, and I'll bring my rationale here for anyone else to "hit me over the head with" if I have been very wrong...

My sole intent when I converted LCTOC to the same alpha choices as LCTOC2 was to decrease the load time of cats that use LCTOC. My IE8 would take forever to load even your main-concern cat. Also, I felt that using the combination of first letters with each and every letter as a second letter, Aa Ab Ac, etc. was extreme overkill, as there are so many of those combinations that (I felt) are never used. So, for most considerations I think I'm correct. I did not want to take any further action until I received input, such as yours above. The difference is the number of combinations that have to be generated for each application. When /aejot is used, then there are 26 x 5 combinations. When /a-z is used, then there are 26 x 26 combinations that must be loaded each time the page is loaded into a browser. So /aejot loads a great deal faster than /a-z.

If your particular application absolutely requires the need for /a-z, then feel free to revert my edit. I have changed over to LCTOC2 for the cats that concern me. Again, my sole purpose was to "fix" LCTOC. If I have broken it for your or anyone else's app, then please accept my apology.

 —   Paine Ellsworth (  CLIMAX )  19:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Why would someone choose this template over {{ Large category TOC 2}}?

On my browser, this template has a horizontal scroll bar that is 13 screen widths wide. Does this show differently for some people, in some way that is better than the display of {{ Large category TOC 2}}? For me, {{ Large category TOC 2}} displays as a wrapped list.

Compare Category:Surnames, which uses this TOC template, with Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL, which uses the TOC 2 template. I don't see the advantage of the scrolling TOC, but I'd love to learn if there is one. I imagine that it's possible there is some historical reason why this template was used more than the TOC 2 template. Anyone? – Jonesey95 ( talk) 01:05, 17 January 2015 (UTC) reply

This template predates the TOC 2 template, and was applied to a large number of categories almost immediately after it was implemented. The TOC 2 form came later, and presumably only some of the categories using the original were converted to use TOC 2. The original form is more compact (2 lines rather than 5 in the browser and screen width I'm using) - I suppose whether you consider this an advantage is a matter of taste. -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:12, 19 September 2015 (UTC) reply

There is some related historical discussion about horizontally scrolling templates at Template_talk:Navigation_bar#CEASE_AND_DESIST.. -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC) reply

After encountering this obnoxious UI again in the wild, I have boldly changed this template to remove horizontal scrolling, which is unfriendly to readers. Feel free to revert me if there really is an advantage to this template that outweighs the unfriendly horizontal scrolling. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 02:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC) reply

I think Jonesey95 changed the only remaining thing that differentiated {{ Large Category TOC}} from {{ Large category TOC 2}}.

Are there any objections to migrating all {{ Large category TOC 2}}s to {{ Large category TOC}}, then TfD'ing {{ Large category TOC 2}}? Pinging everyone who has ever edited {{ Large category TOC 2}} (since its talk page is in disuse): @ Primefac, The Mol Man, Thumperward, WOSlinker, Mclay1, Paine Ellsworth, Cydebot, Funandtrvl, and GoldRingChip: ping.   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  14:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

You could just change the Large category TOC 2 into a redirect to Large Category TOC and leave it at that. -- WOSlinker ( talk) 14:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Agree, especially since they are now both exactly the same. They both call the same Lua module with {{#invoke:Large category TOC|aejot}}, and if that is what editors want, then there is nothing that should stop us from redirecting "LC TOC 2" to "LC TOC", which has been done.   Paine Ellsworth   ^put'r there  15:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

I think I'll still migrate, then redirect instead of TfD, since leaving {{ Large category TOC 2}} gives the false impression that it's distinct from the original.   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  16:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

There should be no need to migrate per NOTBROKEN. Redirecting is all that's needed, and it has been done.   Paine Ellsworth   ^put'r there  16:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Aw. Good point...   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  16:46, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

This template has room for improvement. This is reflecting badly on SEO. The links are two close together. Can someone investigate? Jon (WMF) ( talk) 19:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC) Jon (WMF) ( talk) 19:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC) reply

See the above section. I think this template should be redirected to {{ Large category TOC 2}}. I don't think I've ever started a TfD before, but this might be a good candidate. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 03:44, 19 September 2015 (UTC) reply

I first raised this issue in the Surnames talk page and I've been told to say it here. Some of the sections for the template have become things like "Aj/At", "Bj/Bt" when they should've been "Ai/Au" and such, and I wonder how that happened. I was told that the template was changed months ago so I'm wonder if this can be fixed? Thanks. -- BrydoF1989 ( talk) 15:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC) reply

I changed this template in January 2018 from the previous version, which was a single scrolling horizontal line that was very user-unfriendly. Feel free to link to the discussion you are talking about, and I can contribute there. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 00:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC) reply

Here > /info/en/?search=Category_talk:Surnames#Aj,_Bj,_Cj,_etc.

And yes, I remembered of how it looked then and, I had no issue with it. Of course it would be for those on mobile. Hope you can sort it out the best you can. -- BrydoF1989 ( talk) 08:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC) reply

Can anybody provide further assistance regarding this matter? (Ideally, please ping me when responding.) Thanks in advance for any support. Best wishes-- Hildeoc ( talk) 15:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC) reply

This edit request to Module:Large category TOC has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please make the sandboxed edit. The module currently produces double spaces between many of the links. On Safari (Mac and iOS in desktop view), this causes the table of contents to exceed the width of the the div and to overflow off the right side of the window (or into the Tools sidebar). The edit fixes this by having a space at the beginning of each concatenated string, not also at the end.

On Chrome and Firefox, both versions look identical (which is the correct behavior, since HTML treats double spaces like a single space). You can see both versions at Template:Large category TOC/testcases. To speculate about why this odd glitch occurs, I suppose Safari thinks the double spaces will be twice as long as a single space but displays them as a single space. SilverLocust 💬 02:04, 29 February 2024 (UTC) reply

 Done – Jonesey95 ( talk) 05:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC) reply