Template talk:Largest cities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Cities (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.
 

Capitalization[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. Most capitalization is for proper names, acronyms, and initialisms."), I believe the row header should be "City name" instead of "City Name" (also, it seems like in the test case/example, it should be "English region/country" instead of "English Region/Country"), but the template looks complex enough I'm reluctant to make the change myself. 71.197.244.119 (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

fixed. Frietjes (talk) 20:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! 71.197.244.119 (talk) 06:24, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

No div needed[edit]

In the case where there is no 'div' required, as in {{Largest cities of Nevada}}, if you don't specify one the template displays '[[]]' which is wrong. If div is not provided it should display nothing. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I share this concern. A lot of new templates are being created with columns full of "[[]]", which is both wrong and ugly. --Orlady (talk) 18:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Not everything in these lists is a city[edit]

This template is being used to create "largest cities" lists for some of the U.S. states. Unfortunately, in some states, some of the listed places are not "cities", but have some other legal designation. For example, in both Connecticut and Rhode Island, one or more of the ten largest is a New England town, not a legally incorporated "city." Unfortunately, the template allows no option for any other designation than "cities". Can't this be changed? --Orlady (talk) 18:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this template seems to be quite inflexible. For example, I would like to be able to use piped links for cities like San Ignacio (town), but unfortunately it doesn't seem possible. Kaldari (talk) 06:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Data sources[edit]

Many of these templates are being sourced to http://www.citypopulation.de/USA-Hawaii.html , which does not appear to me to be a WP:RS, although the data seem to be OK. --Orlady (talk) 18:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion discussion started[edit]

A deletion discussion for the applications of this template in U.S. state templates has started at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 April 30. --Orlady (talk) 21:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

City 4, but not City 3[edit]

An image for City 4 cannot be seen without the City 3 image being set up.
Is there an empty or null image that could be used as a placeholder? Or could the code test for a reserved word, e.g. null.bmp, which means to skip that image?
This pertains to Template:Largest cities of Zimbabwe.
99.237.143.219 (talk) 07:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

fixed. Frietjes (talk) 18:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

The "Pop." column heading[edit]

With 3 or 4 photos in the template, the column headings align horizontally.
But with 2 photos, or fewer, "Pop." is out of alignment with the other headings. It's higher.
This effect can be seen in the templates for Zambia and Zimbabwe.
99.237.143.219 (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

fixed. Frietjes (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 30 December 2013[edit]

IP vandalism calls for semi-p, not te. I hope this isn't indicative of how te is applied elsewhere. — Lfdder (talk) 11:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: requests for changes to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
I will waste your time if you waste mine. — Lfdder (talk) 22:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
What Jackmcbarn said. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
No, I think this is a great place for it. — Lfdder (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
With all respect, this is a great place to spin one's wheels on this issue. If you really want to lower the protection, then you are well-advised to take it to RFP with all due speed. – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 00:44, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Remove whitespace[edit]

Like what I did on the sandbox version of this template. Please see the diff. --Zyma (talk) 15:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 19 May 2014 - remove excess bold[edit]

Please remove the excess bold formatting, specifically

  • The name of the country in the table heading (when the templates is used on that country's article page)
  • The names of the cities in the table

The bold formatting does not comply with the general use of bold specified in MOS:BOLD. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: What you are asking for is a change of how the MediaWiki software works (which could be accomplished by changing common.css for .selflink to not be bold). Either way, this isn't the proper venue for that. Try Bugzilla or VPT{{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 12:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
are you asking for the bold to be removed like this? if so, seems reasonable, and doesn't require any change to the MediaWiki software :) Frietjes (talk) 18:59, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
The table headings are bold by default and I wouldn't want to change that. But Frietjes is right about the city names, and I don't think it should be controversial, so we could just make the change and see if anyone objects? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done – names of cities are no longer in bold format – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 04:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
PS. The country (or state) will no longer be excessively bold. Clear your browser's cache. PS left by – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 10:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know the rationale behind the [[{{{country}}}]] code? Specifically why, since this template is mostly used in country and state articles, why does it need to be linked? Yes, this is also used in US state articles where the state name is used as the "country" in the code, and there are demographics articles and city articles that also use this template, so the country/(state) link is "live" and blue on those pages. However, all those articles have links to the same country (or state) names, both in their leads and elsewhere in the articles. I submit that having the country linked in the header of this template, which causes the excessive looking bold that the requester seeks to omit, is nothing more, nothing less than over-linking. If no one objects, I would like to remove that link and resolve this excessive bold problem. – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 05:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. It looks much better now. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I was able to use a parser function (ifeq:) to return the "country" link on all pages that are not the "country" pagename. – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 11:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

fine with me, but make sure there are no pipe-tricks with this parameter (e.g., |country=United States|USA. Frietjes (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Good thought! Okay, the US article doesn't use this template; it uses {{Largest Metropolitan Areas of the United States}} instead, which does not appear to link to the US article at all. If there are any exceptions with pipes, it should be easy to deal with that. – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 22:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
PS. Also, I did something similar at {{Largest Metropolitan Areas of Canada}}. – Paine

Largest cities IN[edit]

Most WP articles are written in formats along the lines of "List of cities in ...". To my mind this is more a specific format less vulnerable subjective interpretations. GregKaye 11:23, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

done. Frietjes (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes just to clarify, most of the article titles, which are obviously themselves presented at tops of the article pages, are written in the format: "List of cities in ..." Titles of templates for some reason, and which are not themselves displayed, are written in the format, "Template:Largest cities of ..." I have also opened an extensive RM re these titles based at Template talk:Largest cities of Acre#Requested move 1 March 2015 and to my reading your edit is supported within this thread. I still thought that you should be aware of the other discussion. GregKaye 14:16, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
The RM mentioned failed mainly, by my reading, on the basis that the title of the large number of templates did not make a difference to the content actually displayed. The argument for consistent content with the 808 articles with titles beginning with the text List of cities in remains. Similar articles replace "cities" with "towns", "towns and cities", metropolitan areas etc. As far as I have seen all titles use "in". GregKaye 08:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Infobox masquerading as a navbox?[edit]

Instances of this template are typically used as a navbox (in a collapsed state at the end of an article) and less frequently as an infobox (uncollapsed in the body of an article). The purpose of a navbox is to aid navigation between closely related articles, nothing more. This "navbox" includes optional parameter for sources (|stat_ref=), populations (|pop_n=) and for graphics (|img_n=). This extra data extends far beyond a navbox and is more appropriate for an infobox. This template currently has a |class=nav parameter. I propose to modify this template so that it accepts a |class=info(box)/nav(box) parameter that would control whether the template behaves like a navbox (displaying only links) or as an infobox (displaying links + populations + graphics + sources). Since this template is more frequently used as a navbox, I further propose that the default value of |class= be set to navbox. Is there support for this change? Boghog (talk) 12:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm in support of these proposed updates to the template. The changes will allow a single template to display the content in better accordance with infobox/navbox guidelines, and avoid removal of valid content. —ADavidB 11:40, 16 July 2015 (UTC)