Template talk:Adjacent communities

application

people started using this on articles on countries. It may be useful in articles on Canadian cities, but it is really just clutter elsewhere. dab (ᛏ) 14:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... hadn't realized that it was in use for countries. I can see a use for it, but editors may well want to modify the design. If so, PLEASE KEEP IN MIND that this is intended for use in city/municipality articles. If you're planning any major changes to adapt the template for countries, please copy the coding to a new template and work from there. That will help to prevent disruption to the pages already using it for surrounding cities. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

this makes sense. countries are linked to {{Geographic Location (8-way)}}, so I'll copy it there for now. I find this was done on 10 Nov by Akanemoto (talk · contribs) [1], without so much as edit summaries, and I am asking myself whether we shouldn't just silently revert. dab (ᛏ) 08:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

arrows and image

This is subjective, but to me the older direction arrows look much better then the larger (if vector) arrows . Could we either revert to the previous version, or convert the old small images to svg? Please! --Qyd 15:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Already done. (I didn't see your note, but was of like mind - the newer ones really look... odd.) What do you think about the globe - could it be replaced? --Ckatz^chat_spy 17:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it just steals focus from the content, serves no practical purpose. Maybe it should be replaced with something less intrusive. --Qyd 22:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

How about this: File:Compass-rose-pale.png instead of this: ? --Qyd 00:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Much more subtle... what do you think? --Ckatz^chat_spy 00:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I like it more than with the Armillary sphere; but I don't think it's perfect, this is what it looks like with all fields:

That compass rose has a 75% tranparency, I could change that if you think it would look better some other way. --Qyd 01:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you think - should we put it up and see what happens? --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, why not :) Unless you think we should request comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject British Columbia and Wikipedia:WikiProject Alberta, as there's where the template is mosly transcluded. --Qyd 00:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I took the liberty of implementing the change, let's see if it's well received... --Qyd 00:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Great... thanks for keeping on top of this - I forgot about it in the December rush! --Ckatz^chat_spy 00:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I coded in an optional parameter named image, it alows to use a custom image in the transcluded template. --Qyd 02:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Nicely done. --Ckatz^chat_spy 04:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Thoughts on renaming to Geographic Location (8-way)....

I think that this template would be more universal if it was renamed Geographic Location (8-way). I found a great use for this template with towns in Vermont--see Guildhall, Vermont. I created Template:Geographic Location (8-way) and redirected it here so that editors of articles in places other than Canada don't say, "when did Vermont join Canada?" . Just something to think about....—MJCdetroit 01:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

No one piped up, so I moved it...—MJCdetroit 20:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Four new directions

User CKatz demands discussion about a feature I implemented, and he subsequently removed. This feature is the inclusion of 4 additional directions - that is, locations for place names to appear, instead of the current 8. The four new ones are ENE, ESE, WNW and WSW. They would appear as follows:

Note that the space they occupy was already there, but always blank. CKatz claims:

1. The presence of these new items complicates the template.
2. They should not be included, since the template does not provide space for their 4 counterparts (NNE, NNW, SSE, SSW).

I say:

1. The new items do not drastically complicate the template- they are a quite minor change, and are no more "confusing" than the current code. There will be no significant change whatsoever to the end user or editor, who can ignore these new slots if he so choses.
2. These four directions are useful, so why should they not be made available? Should we suppress a better product because a perfect one cannot be produced? That's just silly.

Furthermore, let me state the reasons I included these changes in the first place:

1. Some places I was dealing with (The neighborhoods and suburbs of Chicago) have more than three locations neighboring them on a given side. The two additional slots provided in this way allow for all nearby locations to be displayed in a convenient manner.
2. The new slots allow a more accurate display of location, in a world in which things are not always located at 45 degree angles from each other. It is not an exact display, true, but it is an improvement.

Frankly, I did not think this change would be so "controversial" (to one person, so far), and was using them already on several pages before CKatz reverted. --Eliyak T·C 03:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

For clarity, I'll repeat what I've mentioned to Eliyak in the initial discussion on my talk page.

• The template isn't designed for, or suited to, such a fine degree of directional input.
• Further to this, text-based templates do not display with sufficient clarity to make this useful. (It is almost impossible, for example, to differentiate between a two-line entry in the "Northwest" field and the "WNW" field.)
• There is no provision for the other directions (NNW etc.)

Furthermore, I invited Qyd, who also maintains this template, for thoughts on the change. Qyd's reply was "Yes, I believe that further fields would be overkill."

--Ckatz^chat_spy 01:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Surrounds redirected here

I converted the few pages using this template and redirected it here. For reference, the template last appeared like this: [2]. Its talk page contained:

Is this even correct grammar: "Surrounds of Shaker Heights", using Shaker Heights as an example? It doesn't quite seem so. Spencer^T♦C 20:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

--Eliyak T·C 15:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Image not appearing

So, am I just missing something very obvious, or why is the image not appearing on the template on the Fulton, Missouri page?

I just found this template today, and I love it. So, I'm trying to start it on articles about my area, starting with my hometown of Fulton.

Genius00345 (talk) 07:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)