Template talk:IIUS
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Subject Archive | |
|||||
| Style | Links | ||||||
Contents |
[edit] Created an archive
As you can see I've created a subject archive - and since all discussions were closed I archived everything.danielfolsom 17:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- It works, it's just unusual. Try clicking on "Style" or "Links" in the box at top. -Will Beback · † · 22:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] List of United States immigration legislation
I'd forgotten that we have List of United States immigration legislation. This template had some entries that weren't on it so I've updated it now. Since it lists all of the present and proposed legislation, shall we just link to it and omit the two lists in the template? Or perhaps also keep a link to pending legislation. I've noticed that the template is getting longer and longer. (It might be useful to create a list of immigration-related organizations too.) ·:·Will Beback ·:· 04:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Eek that's a tough one - I almost think that having one link isn't enough - but I agree that the current number might be too many. Too bad there's not a way to just have the really notable ones on here (haha: if you're article has 10 or more solutions - it can go on the template!). If you have something in mind then I'll just leave it up to you, because I'm really blanking on ideas--danielfolsom 05:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Let's think about it. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 07:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit]
Template:IIUSfooter is a horizontal version of this template. It looks good, and is much less obtrusive on smaller articles. It looks so good that I propose we simply use it in all circumstances and drop this vertical version entirely. That will avoid the problem of two versions to maintain. Some editors have put hard work in assmbling this info, but formatting is a secondary attribute to which we needn't be attached. Thoughts? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Fine, but I think that we should delete Template:IIUSfooter and copy it into here due to extensive talk - in fact I'm going to do that..--danielfolsom 17:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, that makes sense. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Negative Population Growth
That organizations seems to have more to do with reducing births than immigration. - Schrandit (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- I would agree - they might be somewhat involved in immigration - but they are definitely not an Illegal Immigration group.--danielfolsom 19:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AAB (Acronyms are bad)
The current list - CHIRLA · CCIR · NIF · FIRM · WAAA · CASA · NA · MM · MB · FAIR · MMP · MCDC · CCIR · SOS · CIS · NUSA · NPG · MPI · YDSM - is dreadful and meaningless. This section should include the full name of these groups and divide them into meaningful subsets if possible. A show/hide button could be used just for this section. -- Banjeboi 02:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I was just thinking the same thing. I'm familiar withthe field, but even so only a few of those are meaningful. Will Beback talk 03:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- If it's becoming a useless template list it might make a good article list as in List of notable non-government organizations involved with illegal immigration issues in the United States and the template then only has to link to the list. -- Banjeboi 03:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that the list is useless, it's just the acronyms that aren't informative. Will Beback talk 04:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I thought you meant that only some of those groups should be listed. What would make the most sense then? -- Banjeboi 04:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Right - I meant that the acronyms were not meaningful. I don't see a problem with writing out the names, and then collapsing the section if it gets too long, as you suggested. Will Beback talk 04:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I support leaving them off. -- Banjeboi 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'd be for keeping them in somewhere, maybe diving them into different organizations by view within this template or perhaps starting a new template devoted to the organizations themselves. - Schrandit (talk) 17:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I looked around and saw that there are quite a few organizations in Category:Immigrant rights organizations and Category:Immigration political advocacy groups in the United States that should also be included in the list Adding them would make the list even more unwieldly. I'm not sure what the template does that the categories don't already do. Maybe we should link to the categories? Will Beback talk 18:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- That would also work, eventually we'll have a list of the groups and we can update the link to that. -- Banjeboi 01:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I have no objection to a standalone list. Will Beback talk 03:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- That would also work, eventually we'll have a list of the groups and we can update the link to that. -- Banjeboi 01:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I looked around and saw that there are quite a few organizations in Category:Immigrant rights organizations and Category:Immigration political advocacy groups in the United States that should also be included in the list Adding them would make the list even more unwieldly. I'm not sure what the template does that the categories don't already do. Maybe we should link to the categories? Will Beback talk 18:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'd be for keeping them in somewhere, maybe diving them into different organizations by view within this template or perhaps starting a new template devoted to the organizations themselves. - Schrandit (talk) 17:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I support leaving them off. -- Banjeboi 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Right - I meant that the acronyms were not meaningful. I don't see a problem with writing out the names, and then collapsing the section if it gets too long, as you suggested. Will Beback talk 04:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I thought you meant that only some of those groups should be listed. What would make the most sense then? -- Banjeboi 04:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that the list is useless, it's just the acronyms that aren't informative. Will Beback talk 04:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- If it's becoming a useless template list it might make a good article list as in List of notable non-government organizations involved with illegal immigration issues in the United States and the template then only has to link to the list. -- Banjeboi 03:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
