Template talk:New Hampshire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of Project New Hampshire; an effort to create, expand, and improve New Hampshire-related articles to a feature-quality standard. |
Contents |
[edit] Deletion of Golden Triangle "Region"
I do not know why Golden Triangle is listed as a region in this template. It is not an official region in the state. It is also, as descibed, totally within the Merrimack Valley Region. I also am still not convinced of its significance. See also Talk:Golden Triangle (New Hampshire). I am holding off reverting to my prior deletion so others can weigh in and to avoid a revert war. Assawyer 03:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- It's a subsection of the Merrimack Valley, so it probably isn't appropriate unless the Merrimack Valley is broken up into other parts, and I can't think of specific names for "Non-Golden Triangle" parts of the Valley, other than maybe "The Capitol Area". karmafist 17:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Large template?
Are we sure we need such a large template? How useful is it to have every single town and unincorparated area listed on every single NH-related page. Seems like overkill
For example, in the case of Dartmouth-Lake Sunapee, the template dominates the page. -- Kaszeta 21:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
- We could do what Massachusetts does, but i'd be strongly against it, having all those towns and cities in one place for quick reference has been a lifesaver today.karmafist 17:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- What does it do for you that a simple list of New Hampshire towns in a separate article doesn't (like the Mass. template)? -- Kaszeta 16:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- The Template is useful as it provides a quick list of all cities, towns, and unincorporated places in NH, among other links. Since it is at the bottom of articles, the space it takes up is relatively insignificant. The proportional size of the template to some stubs is not a justifiable reason (in my opinion) to hack away at this template. Also, see about reasons for keeping as it. Assawyer 06:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Again, what does it do that List_of_New_Hampshire_places doesn't? -- Kaszeta 16:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Unfortuately you do not grasp my opinion. If you would like a more specific answer, I can give you one. However, merely restating your origional question after I have take the time to hopefully answer your question is in my opinion disrespectful. Assawyer 21:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
-
UniReb has seen fit to replace the long list of towns with a link to List of towns in New Hampshire. While I preferred to see the full list in the template, for the same reasons given by Karmafist and Assawyer, if it isn't going to list the towns, it surely shouldn't list the unincorporated locations. But I would rather see it reverted to the full list than have the unincorporated locations similarly replaced. - Biederman 18:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have reverted for the above stated reasons, and that there is currently no overriding reason to delete the list of towns. Assawyer 19:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that this template is way too big. I added a "hide" feature some time ago but someone deleted it. Instead of listing every place in New Hampshire, it should include only cities, counties, regions and topics, with an included link to a page which lists all towns and unincorporated areas. Check out the Vermont template for guidance. Prezboy1 18:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] U.S. state templates
Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates lists and displays all 50 U.S. state (and additional other) templates. It potentially can be used for ideas and standardization. //MrD9 07:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Standardization of state templates
There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding standardization of state templates (primarily regarding layout and styling) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates. An effort was made earlier this year to standardize Canadian province templates (which mostly succeeded). Lovelac7 and I have already begun standardizing all state templates. If you have any concerns, they should be directed toward the discussion page for state template standardization. Thanks! — Webdinger BLAH | SZ 22:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
