# Centering part label and ornament on page in tufte-book

I'm writing a book using tufte-book and pdflatex through ShareLaTeX, and I want to have multiple parts for that book, with the part label centered horizontally in the page. The standard tufte style is to center it horizontally in the text area, and this text area is not centered horizontally in the page due to the large margin for notes, so the part label is not centered absolutely in the page. I want to fix this for just the part labels and not for chapters/sections/regular text.

I tried using the fullwidth environment, but that put an empty page before the "new part page", which is not desired.

Also, I'm incorporating a pgfornament into the part label, and irregardless of whether I use fullwidth or not, the pgfornament is not centered relative to the text. I want it to be centered.

How can I fix this?

MWE:

\documentclass[letter]{tufte-book}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{graphicx,rotating}
\usepackage[object=vectorian]{pgfornament}
\usepackage{tkzexample,tikzrput,pict2e,picture}
\usetikzlibrary{shapes.geometric,calc}
\usepackage{eso-pic,calc}

\newcommand{\formatpart}[1]{%
\centering%
\partname~\thepart%
\newline%
\hfil\pgfornament[width=4cm]{84}\hfil%
\newline%
#1%
}

{\part} % command
[block] % shape
{\bfseries\sc\Huge} % format
{} % label
{0pt} % sep
{ \formatpart
}%

\begin{document}

\begin{fullwidth}
\part{The Part To Fix}
\end{fullwidth}

\part{The Part To Fix 2}

\end{document}


Update: As per @godbyk's comment, moving the \begin{fullwidth} ... \end{fullwidth} code to the beginning and end of the \formatpart macro and removing the \hfil commands gives the desired appearance.

• If you move the \begin{fullwidth} ... \end{fullwidth} code to the beginning and end of the \formatpart macro and remove the \hfil commands, does it give you the desired appearance? – godbyk May 5 '18 at 0:48
• @neoconcinnity: I'm having the same issue, but I don't understand exactly how the solution would look like. Could you please update your code to show that? I must be missing something obvious here. – Logarithmic Derivative Feb 26 at 17:40