Talk:Lists by country
transportation by country needs to be included in the table...
It'd be nice if the red links for each country were blank (as for the lists of people from each country)
- If there is an easy way to do that and maintain them ..
- The main reason there are no red list of people links, is that I'm/was too lazy to complete them, but ideally there would at least be the names of the lists (in black, if not red). Docu
(after removal of table)
I really don't like the new structure. I think the table version was FAR better. If no good argument is given in favor of the new structure, I will revert back to the table version. olivier 12:52 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
- I made the change from table to list because I was quite unhappy with the table version. Generally I think lists work far better than tables, but in this case I'm not completely satisfied with the result. One component of my effort was also to integrate the separate lists after had been added after the table in the past version. The main problem currently is that the list just becomes too long. One sollution could be to break it up to several lists but there is also a relevant discussion to be settled, on the purpose of the list and what should and should not be included. -- Mic
Actually, the initial table layout was based on a proposal on Talk:List of reference tables. I tend to think that the table was quite easy to read, as there were only three elements there, i.e.
- Lists of people
- Lists for country related topics
- Lists of cities
I'd include lists available for, e.g. 40-60 countries, and leave others separatly at the end (or at the beginning?). Good candidates for inclusion would be the "subnational entities". Docu 17:04 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
- The advantage of a list is really the simplicity. Perhaps it is just me, but I think that part of that simplicity is lost when you try to integrate several lists into a table. Neither is simplicity helped by several concurrent diversely styled lists, and lists of lists added before or after a table. Regardless of whether a list or reference table is to be implemented I think that it should be agreed that there ought to be one concept, not several concurrent and possibly conflicting ad hoc concepts, guiding the layout of the page. To me it seems reasonable to split the different listings to separate entries. I feel that the increase in complexity of entries is far less of a fault than not preserving the simplicity of lists. -- Mic 19:37 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
- It's fairly simple to add entries for every country to a table (rather than a list), at least if one doesn't create the table manually. Maybe, I should add a short HowTo on this.
- Country articles and specialised lists (e.g. List of cities) generally include enumerations of lists simply by country, thus an additional one, structured in a similar way would somewhat duplicate the effort there.
- It's just my personal preference, but I find a "general table + specific list"-solution easier to get an overview of lists included or, e.g. check for broken links due to Michael Hardy's ponctuation correction.
Docu 20:36 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
- I'd say that clarity and simplicity of the presentation is the overriding concern here. I'm not sure that reduction of ones own labour is a relevant criteria, and if that should be the case one is not really obliged either to do the work or to participate. Reducing redundancy is desirable. This is of course opposite to perpetuating it and the first thing to go is obviously the individual links to countries, since there already is a List of countries. The question is really why it is necessary to cram several lists into one page? While I support the notion of "list of lists" articles, I am not a fan of a concept like "lists of lists" within single articles. -- Mic 12:53 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
- There is also already a list of people by nationality, btw. I quite like the consolidated table, mind you, but I'm not sure why... Martin