Template talk:Infobox settlement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"Auto" density should compute based on land area, not total area[edit]

Population density has to do with settle-able area. While there are cities with "houseboat" units, these are never a significant portion of any particular settlement and, if there were such a settlement, it ought to use a different template. I fear that a lot of the listed densities for cities are wrong due to this error. Zelbinian (talk) 07:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

100% agree. See Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, Florida whose actual population density is 6,913 persons/sqmi (when calculated based on land area) and not 3,900 persons/sqmi (when calculated based on total area). (talk) 14:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
If the land area is given, sure. But if only the total area is known, the template should still display a density. —Stepheng3 (talk) 17:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
how about if we add the option for "density_km2 = land" to have it use the land area? Frietjes (talk) 19:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
We shouldn't have different instances of this template displaying values calculated using different methods, under the same heading. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Reviving this conversation... I agree with Andy Mabbett, yet I must say that this is a valid request, and I think Stepheng3's suggestion is sound – that is, if |area_land_*= is specified, then use it, else use |area_total_*=. The U.S. Census computes and reports density using land area. Note the following, from Census.gov Geographic Definitions -- Population Density:

"Population and housing unit density are computed by dividing the total population or number of housing units within a geographic entity (for example, United States, state, county, place) by the land area of that entity measured in square kilometers or square miles. Density is expressed as both "people (or housing units) per square kilometer" and "people (or housing units) per square mile" of land area." (emphasis added)

For many communities, the difference is negligible, but for others, this is significant. In Provincetown, Massachusetts, for example, with a 2010 total population of 2,942, a total area of 17.5 sq. miles, and land area of 9.7 sq. mi., the density is being calculated as 168, where it should be 304. Provincetown (CDP), Massachusetts is even more substantial, where the present formula yields a density of 505, when it should calculate to 1479. Anyone have a problem adding an {{edit protected}} request? Grollτech (talk) 18:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please don't do that until you've found or written code that would permit this. It's a very good idea, but you need to make it plain for non-tech-savvy admins like me. Nyttend (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
US Census data is not mandatory for that field. If WP would only show US Census data, it would be much smaller. But the field should show where the value comes from, i.e. "Density (Land)" or "Density (Land+Water)" or show both if there is a diff. NVanMinh (talk) 06:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
There's nothing more reliable than the Census Bureau, so we should use Census Bureau results for the fields in question. However, I don't understand why you bring this up here; could you explain why you mention it? Nyttend (talk) 13:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
If nobody who's already familiar with this template's code is available to make the change, I'd be happy to go ahead and code the changes in the sandbox. NVanMinh, I understand that U.S. Census data isn't mandatory for the field, and that this is a global (not U.S.-centric) template. However, it is obvious that the 'area', 'population' and 'density' fields within this infobox are based on the Census Bureau's data model. More importantly, as the OP stated, "Population density has to do with settle-able area." This view is consistent with the population density article, which defines biological population density as "population divided by total land area or water volume, as appropriate." Since humans are the subject biota of {{Infobox settlement}}, Land Area is really the only valid basis for computing density. And yet, since this template presently provides the "courtesy" of automatic calcs based on Total Area, it should probably continue to do so, but only if the value for "Land Area" is absent – in that instance, it may be appropriate to annotate the result with something like "(based on Total Area)"? Grollτech (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Infobox settlement
 • City 100.105 sq mi (259.27 km2)
 • Land 97.915 sq mi (253.60 km2)
 • Urban 246.8 sq mi (639 km2)
 • Metro 357.9 sq mi (927 km2)
Population (2010)
 • City 466,488
 • Estimate (2011) 477,891
 • Density 4,700/sq mi (1,800/km2)
 • Urban 1,440,000
 • Urban density 5,800/sq mi (2,300/km2)
 • Metro 2,600,000
 • Metro density 7,300/sq mi (2,800/km2)
Area 100.105 sq mi (259 km2)
 - land 97.915 sq mi (254 km2)
 - urban 246.8 sq mi (639 km2)
 - metro 357.9 sq mi (927 km2)
Population 466,488 (2010)
 - urban 1,440,000
 - metro 2,600,000
Density 4,660 / sq mi (1,799 / km2)
 - urban 5,835 / sq mi (2,253 / km2)
 - metro 7,265 / sq mi (2,805 / km2)
I agree with the suggested change, but to make it simpler I would keep the title Density if calculated based on area_total and use the title Density (land) if calculated based on area_land. I also have two related suggestions that I think should be implemented at the same time:
Suggestion #1: To the far right is an infobox with population_total (for an official census) and population_est (for a more recent estimate). As can be seen in the example (or by examining Template:Infobox settlement/densdisp), the auto density calculation is currently population_total divided by area_total (4660 which the template rounds to 4700), not divided by population_est (4774 which would be rounded to 4800). However, this may not be clear to the reader since the density appears below the estimated population. Therefore I suggest that the density be displayed above the estimate, immediately below the total population, as is done with both the urban and metro population densities (note: Geobox uses a different order, which is all populations first, followed by all densities).
Suggestion #2: The auto density calculation should be rounded to the nearest whole number. In the examples to the right, the auto density calculation in Template:Geobox rounds to 4660 (the nearest whole number) but Template:Infobox municipality rounds to 4700. This is handled in Template:Infobox settlement/densdisp which appears to round the number based on its order of magnitude. If there is no good reason to do this, that code could be simplified to always display a whole number. If there is a good reason to leave it as is, then I suggest the addition of a parameter named population_density_round (such as exists in Template:Geobox) which could override the default rounding for the auto calculated density.
-- Zyxw (talk) 06:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Area rows[edit]

If area_total_ is left blank (maybe because of lack of data) then land, urban and rural area rows show up in the previous section (for example in the unrelated Government section) Windroff (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

@Windroff: Please give an example of a page where this is happening. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Here you can see a minimal example. Windroff (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
It's because you've got |total_type=  - that suppresses certain rows, including the "Area" header. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
The area header should always show up if there's any area row set, regardless of total_type value. There should be some added logic for when blank area_total_ is not set and total_type=&nbsp. Windroff (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Concerning |total_type=, the documentation does state 'to set a non-standard label for total area and population rows' and 'This overrides other labels for total population/area. To make the total area and population display on the same line as the words "Area" and "Population", with no "Total" or similar label, set the value of this parameter to  .' (twice). Against |settlement_type=, the documentation states 'if urban, rural or metro figures are not present, the label is Total unless total_type is set' (again, twice). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
It is not in the docs, it's only implied there. Regardless of the area data display format, it should show up in the correct section. Once the area data format is chosen, correctness of the display must not depend on data availability: if it did, simply unsetting a data row (maybe because it's outdated or not referenced) would break the template. Windroff (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@Windroff: fixed. Frietjes (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
@Frietjes: Thank you. Windroff (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
@Frietjes: If there is no area data set, it shows an empty Area section. See here. Windroff (talk) 22:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
@Windroff: fixed. Frietjes (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
@Frietjes: Thank you. Windroff (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Typo bug in template?[edit]

See before this work around edit for no space after "Area". comp.arch (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

The lack of a space is intentional. It's because the |area_footnotes= parameter is intended to hold a <ref>...</ref> reference, and there should be no space before these. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
I believe area_rank is a better field for listing the area rank. Frietjes (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

image skyline parameter[edit]

I find it confusing that the main image parameter is named 'image_skyline', since most settlements don't have a skyline. Why not just call it 'image'? Kaldari (talk) 19:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Because that could cause confusion. Besides |image_skyline=, there are five more images: |image_flag= |image_seal= |image_shield= |image_blank_emblem= |image_map= - and then there are the various maps. That said, the template does have |image=, but that doesn't have the sophisticated processing of the other means for displaying images. It takes the full image syntax, but doesn't process it in any way so doesn't work out automatic sizing or positioning. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)