Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. counties/county lists

Untitled

I really like these new county list templates, good job folks.

I do, however, find it unfortunate that when somebody applied this template to List of Counties in Indiana there was no place for the county license plate codes in the template.

According to U.S._and_Canadian_license_plates#County-coded there are seven states that use county numbering on their license plates. Would you consider creating a template that contains a column for county license plate codes as well? This information is no more esoteric than FIPS codes.

--Bennyfactor 22:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• I agree. --Dystopos 20:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I'll try and get this sorted, but it won't be this weekend. Drop me a message on my talk page if hasn't appeared by this time next week.
    • Oops, didn't sign the above commment. I'll try and get this sorted by the end of the week... leave a message on my talk page if I haven't done so by the weekend. 17:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, done! {{countyrow}} provides all the functionality of {{County7}}, with the option of up to zero to six (yes, six!) columns of additional information. Plus, it's coded in a way that the facility for extra columns can be added without effecting exsisting pages. See the template for full documentation. Tompw (talk) (review) 20:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't like some of the changes. Why are the creation, origin, and etymology fields optional? Why are those fields called "data1", "data2" etc and not the more familiar "for", "year" etc? I understand that they still stay as is in the county7 template, but most of us (especially me) are used to it.--Crzycheetah 07:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The creation, origin, and etymology fields are optional because not all county lists use them (For example, List of counties in Hawaii had the creation and origin columns removed as a result of its FL nomination). The reason I abandoned the specific names is to provide an easy way to insert additional information between the normal columns. (For example, the license plate codes in List of counties in Indiana are to the left of the creation year). Tompw (talk) (review) 19:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I forgot that Hawaii nomination. Would you prefer to use the {{Countyrow}} template instead of the "county7" template in all county lists, even though there were no additional info required?--Crzycheetah 20:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the update. List of counties in Alabama is now using the new template to accommodate license plate numbers. --Dystopos 20:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Re the countyrow template: Why is it inserting extra linefeeds in the county seat and (at least) the data4 line? I can't figure it out. Look at the Hawaii list for an example. --Golbez 00:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

That was caused by bad coding on my part... fixed now. Tompw (talk) (review) 20:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

New template

I was working on List of counties in Tennessee and consolidating the list list so that it may eventually be a featured list and decided why not have a template that does the column titles too. There is one for the rows so there might as well be one to create the top part and that way it wont require as much table coding as it would simply using a template on the list pages. I have tried my best to make it so that it matches well with the {{Countyrow}} template as possible. It will be up shortly at {{Countytabletop}}. Let me know what you think and please help make any changes so that it will work to its best potential. ~Dan9186 November 26, 2007 03:07 (UTC)

I have gotten the template up and included setup so that it can be used for the Alaska lists and other such lists that might not use county as a header. There is only one issue that I have run into and that is getting the reference for the FIPS codes to work off of the state initials. I am going to continue work on that over the next week or so but if someone else knows how to fix it any help would be appreciated. If you have any suggestions or issues that need to be addressed such that this template could be used for the other lists please let me know and I will see what I can do. ~Dan9186 November 26, 2007 08:39 (UTC)

Etymology

• I question the usefulness of this column for a list such as this. That seems like the sort of information that often resists very short treatments and is better placed in the article on the county itself. Also I'm not sure that 'etymology' is even the correct term for the derivation of proper names. --Dystopos 20:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Given the typical width of the column, "source of county name" would work fine. I disagree that that the information cannot be summarised. For example if the county is named after a notable person, then the wikilink to that person's article will allow the reader to find out why they have a county name after them. Tompw (talk) (review) 21:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree twice. Etymology should not generally be attempted here and the term is misleading. Many name sources are appropriate. "Source of name" is shorter and sufficient; of course that's the county name. Is there a general technical term, such as eponym when the source is a personal name? Maybe "Eponym" is ok even if it is a loose fit? --P64 (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Problem with List of counties in Iowa

Near the end of the list all the templates are just links. Could someone take a look at the page and help me figure out what's wrong with it? Psychless 20:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Outstanding tasks

We near the point where very county list page has a basic level of information (seats, year of creation, populations and areas) with a reasonably consistent layout ({{countyrow}} and {{countytabletop}}). Big thanks to everyone who's helped get things this far, especially Crzycheetah. I would like to suggest the following to help bring all lists up to FL standard:

• Contact state wikiprojects to request they add information, especially into the lead. They have specific knowledge (especially for sources/references) which will prove useful
• Ensure layout is standardised, by applying {{countytabletop}} where not present, and converting the few lists that still use {{county7}} to {{countyrow}}
• Ensure lists follow MoS guidelines with regard to things like section orders etc.

Any thoughts/commetns/additions? Tompw (talk) (review) 20:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Labeled Map

I saw Forcesdumal13 changed change the map used in List of counties in New Jersey (an FL) to a labeled map. When I undid the edit (providing a reason in my edit summary), he changed it back, saying "this is the same type of map used for almost ALL of the western states (see: CA, TX, MI, MT, OK, OR". I figured this would be the best place to discuss which map is better, as it probably affects other county maps. My reasons for reversion were

1. More aesthetically pleasing (FL criteria 5a)
2. Article-specific ALT text can be added that says "see the list for details" (which was suggested by ALT text guru Eubulides at the FLC)
3. The labeled map's only benefit are the links, which can by seen in the table. Mm40 (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I think the labeled template map is more aesthetically pleasing. It also matches the colors advocated on the Maps wikiproject. The labeled map can still have alt text, it just needs to be added on the template page. The links are a nice addition. Kmusser (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Independent Cities

At List of counties in Virginia the "Date" for independent cities needs attention. See Talk:List of counties in Virginia.

"Origin" is empty for most Virginia counties. For its Inde Cities, the point is origin of their IC status, commonly long after they were established as cities in the ordinary sense. In those cases it will be routine to enter some Origins along with the Dates when those are researched.

We have three other independent cities as county equivalents in the United States, one each in Maryland, Missouri, and Nevada, whose county lists are all Featured Lists (while Virginia is far short of that). Here are their Name, Date, and Origin fields for the independent cities.

• Baltimore City, 1851, "Founded in 1729. Detached in 1851 from Baltimore County"
• St. Louis City, 1876, "Created in 1876 when city residents voted to secede from St. Louis County"
• Carson City, 1969, "Separated from Ormsby County"

The latter is not very good, and so much would be easy to do quickly for all of the Virginia IC. The first two provide models for Virginie aspiration. ... The Baltimore model is easier to research ;-) so I have revised the latter thus.

• Carson City, 1969, "Founded 1858, consolidated with rump Ormsby county in 1969."

All of the Nevada entries end with a period(.) so that fits the local style. --P64 (talk) 17:55, 10 July 2010 (UTC)