Talk:List of lighthouses in Portugal

The recent conversion to table format

Please give it a check. There may be some mistakes.

If you want mass changes, like alphasorting the lot (I added some new items at the bottom, so the sorting, which is roughly as it was before the tables, is not perfect), or hyperlinking all the regions, etc. please say. I can do that automatically and quickly. Also, consider giving me instructions like entering a certain body of water to all in a particular region. I can do that automatically too. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

As a non-lighthouse aficionado, I am not convinced that moving to a table format is the correct move in Portugal. First, because there are so few lighthouses with explicit information, making the table almost meaninglessly devoid of information. Second, the bulky format of the table is not user-friendly, especially when it comes to mobile users. Was there a consensus made about converting the Portuguese lighthouse page into table format? ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 12:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I should also note that all the Azores-related information (region and municipality) is all wrong. The islands are not municipalities. ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 12:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Good points about remaining devoid of info, and the bulkiness for mobile users. I did not get consensus. I just did it boldly along with other such lists. I figured it would encourage article creation. I can see the cells not being filled for a few decades. :) As for the Azores-related issue, perhaps a more all-purpose heading would do the trick. So, where to go from here? Please advise. What I would love to see is the images remain somehow. Otherwise, they just sit there and never become articles. When you have images and redlinked articles together on a page, people make articles out of them. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the version before the table, I have to say that it really didn't convey much. I mean, there were a few pics, but it was not much different from clicking the category. At least now it contains around 150 items compared to the 100 before, plus with all the images, it conveys much more than before. Hopefully, it can develop over time to look like List of lighthouses and lightvessels in Germany or even List of lighthouses in Norway. Maybe this list just needs time to fall into line with the other European lists and others like Category:Lists of lighthouses in the United States. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:33, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Actually, there was a bit of a discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lighthouses#Template:Lighthouses and lightvessels in Europe. See also the mini-project page I started on Aug 25 here: User:Anna Frodesiak/Blue sandbox. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

The recent conversion to list format

Hi Zeorymer, I can see that the sortable table has been changed back to a simple list, presumably due to the concerns you had noted in 2014?...Jokulhlaup (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh, hey. Yes, I did revert it back to the list table. For the above points, but I will likely transform it into the Lighthouse Project preferred format, once content has been developed. I have noticed that your work on other lighthouse projects/lists has been comprehensive, and I hope you will understand, until more content is developed/researched, the use of a table just shows the glaring lack of content. I think, also, that removing redlinks on this page may be helpful, as too, renaming to the English-naming equivalency. But, I am flexible on these issues. I am kinda torn at this moment between the "Castles of Portugal" and "Lighthouses of Portugal" articlespaces, so I will continue to develop content, research and reference them accordingly. But, as was mentioned back in 2014, there is no content development, making the use of a vacant table self-defeating for the subject matter. There are sources at SIPA (Portuguese Architectural Information System) to allow content development, so I will try to advance that. Then we can transform the content back to a table. ;) ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 11:41, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for replying, I agree with you that developing articles is more important than creating lists - It is always a bit chicken and egg - articles first and then lists, or the other way around? I admit I did have a look at the German list but it seemed to cover only a limited number of sites, and there wss the problem of deciding on English naming conventions which is something I can see you mentioned, and is a pain - so I wasn't going to do anything with this list...Jokulhlaup (talk) 13:36, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of lighthouses in Portugal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100805124546/http://direccaofarois.marinha.pt/pt/Pages/home.aspx to http://direccaofarois.marinha.pt/pt/Pages/home.aspx
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.nga.mil/NGAPortal/MSI.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=msi_portal_page_62&pubCode=0007
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101113194727/http://www.lighthousesrus.org/Europe/Portugal.htm to http://www.lighthousesrus.org/Europe/Portugal.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111130125828/http://trabas.de/html/portugal.html to http://www.trabas.de/html/portugal.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)