Template talk:Lancashire elections
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Trappedinburnley in topic Lancashire flag
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Merseyside and Greater Manchester
editShould this Template include Merseyside and Greater Manchester councils up until 1973 as they were within Lancashire until local government reorganisation in 1973 with the establishment of the Metropolitan Counties? 77.97.183.195 (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- Currently
{{Merseyside elections}}
and{{Greater Manchester elections}}
include pre-1974 results, so you'd need to get consensus to change all three templates. I think it would probably cause confusion and inconvenience to have some boroughs split across two templates. -- Dr Greg talk 19:49, 6 June 2017 (UTC)- Agreed; I think the current arrangement is the most satisfactory. If anything were needed, it could be adding a "Below" section to the template with links to the Merseyside and GM election templates. Number 57 20:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Lancashire flag
editI've twice tried to replace the Lancashire Flag icon with a more appropriate one. As Flag of Lancashire says, this flag was designed by the Friends of Real Lancashire in 2008 as the flag of the historic county. IMO this flag not legitimate, but even if others disagree, using it for topics relating to the ceremonial county is problematic. Your thoughts Number 57? Trappedinburnley (talk) 08:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Using the flagicon is standard for these templates. I think your problem is actually with {{Country data Lancashire}} if it not currently displaying an appropriate flag for the county (I see the flag is used to represent the ceremonial county in numerous articles though, e.g. Blackpool, City of Lancaster). You can change that to whatever an appropriate flag/icon is. Number 57 11:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks I've started a discussion there. Although I doubt it will get me very far, or that there is much reason to maintain a standard format in this case, I won't make the same edit again.Trappedinburnley (talk) 20:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)