Template talk:Wisconsin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Wisconsin (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Listings alphabetically or by population?[edit]

The alphabetical listing of major cities in the older version of the template was much easier to navigate through. Listing the cities by population necessitates changing the template after changes in relative population, plus looks haphazard. Other state templates also use alphabetic listings (Template:Washington, Template:California, Template:California).

The deletion of the regions also was unnessessary; a better solution would be to write articles for the regions rather than just imply that the only region in Wisconsin was the Lake Superior Lowland.

The older template also was more compact, and fit better within an article. (Compare with other state templates, again.) If anything, Wisconsin's template should be made more compact, not larger.--BaronLarf 09:01, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

I took you suggestions into consideration and created a compact template for the admittedly much more rural state of West Virginia. I agree that alphabetically listing cities makes the section more navigable; however, I wanted to impose some sort of hierarchy of cities and to feature more isolated, smaller cities rather than suburbs of Milwaukee.

Note the compactness of the template, the alphabetical listing of cities, the highlighting of the state capital, and the efficient data organization.

As for the regions, I'd like to see some with articles already written becuase they tend to lend themselves more easily to articles, however, I haven't found any for Wisconsin.

Part of the reason that there's nothing to write about these regions is that they're not natural regions that are commonly used by people living in Wisconsin. I'd say better regions would be something along the lines of maybe the Madison area, the Milwaukee area, the Fox River Valley, I'll look into it. But the ones that are in use now are strictly geographical and have no cultural or social meaning.

I would suggest using Southeast Wisconsin (Greater Milwaukee), Southwest Wisconsin, Western Wisconsin, Central Wisconsin and Northeast Wisconsin since they seem to coincide with the Wisconsin Media Markets and therefore have SOME cultural relevance. Maybe keep Chicagoland and add the Twin Ciites metro area (since in theory, both of them have Wisconsin suburbs). --Illwauk 21:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

U.S. state templates[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates lists and displays all 50 U.S. state (and additional other) templates. It potentially can be used for ideas and standardization. //MrD9 07:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Standardization of state templates[edit]

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding standardization of state templates (primarily regarding layout and styling) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates. An effort was made earlier this year to standardize Canadian province templates (which mostly succeeded). Lovelac7 and I have already begun standardizing all state templates. If you have any concerns, they should be directed toward the discussion page for state template standardization. Thanks! — Webdinger BLAH | SZ 23:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Light blue[edit]

Is there a particular reason why this template is light blue? Wouldn't it be better to just go with the default used by {{navbox}} to avoid having a rainbow at the bottom of the page when this navbox is next to another one and per WP:ACCESSIBILITY? Please let me know if there is a strong reason to have it a particular color. I noticed this was attempted recently, but was reverted, so I thought I would be proactive and start a thread here to avoid an edit war. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Since there are no objections, I will go ahead and change it to use the default. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 06:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)