Jump to content

Template talk:US state navigation box

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tnavbar-header

[edit]

I think adding the header (view, discuss, and edit) to the template will invite a lot of vandalism and undesirable changes. Vandals are most often inexperienced users who might have difficulty finding a template in order to change it, but this addition puts the power at their fingertips. After all if you're going to write graffiti, you might as well affect 100s of articles instead of just one at a time.--Appraiser 20:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. Is there a way to add show/hide but remove the edit options? Also, links to the captial city seem to have broken sometime today (though I could be mistaken). -Susanlesch 20:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yup, you're definitely right about that screwing up the capital links in FireFox. Right now I have no idea why, so I just turned off the view/talk/edit template until we can get this figured out. I'll do some tests in my sandbox tomorrow to try to fix it. --CapitalR 10:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In edits made on April 2nd & 3rd I successfully added {{Tnavbar}} to create the "v-d-e" (view, discuss, edit) links. While implementing that I also added "show/hide" to deal with articles containing multiple navigation boxes at the bottom of the page (see Sacramento, California or Denver, Colorado). This was done via class=collapsible and a new collapse_state parameter that can force the template to display in one of three states: collapsed, expanded, or autocollapse (default setting: only collapse when more than one collapsible template on a page). If the individual U.S. state templates are updated to pass along this parameter, by adding:
| collapse_state = {{{1}}}
then the following would be possible:
{{Colorado|collapsed}} - insert Colorado navbox, collapsed
{{Colorado|expanded}} - insert Colorado navbox, expanded
Hopefully that will eliminate some of the concerns raised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates back in Aug/Sep 2006. I also updated the documentation and moved it to Template:US state navigation box/doc which is transcluded for viewing in Template:US state navigation box. The end result can be seen by viewing this edit. Note: You won't find any of this in the current version because all of my edits were reverted today (for more information see the #Revert discussion below).
Zyxw 04:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

[edit]

Hello. I don't see consensus for omitting v-d-e and show-hide on the page cited in the edit history and am thinking about reverting to the new design pending a note on the user's talk page. -Susanlesch 00:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates#Straw Polls and read all other issues. Why don't we create Template:US state navigation box 2 for people who prefer the show/hide features. —RJN 00:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Template:US state navigation box 2 has been created for people who prefer the show/hide features edited by Zyxw. —RJN 00:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • RJN, that was nice of you. The problem is you've changed the default for fifty states who just got used to the new one. Would you consider swapping the code between the two templates? Thanks in advance. -Susanlesch 01:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As the one who added these features to the template, I don't think there is any need for two separate "US state navigation box" templates. I only see two ways that might be used:
  1. Some of the state navigation box templates implemented with Template:US state navigation box switch over to style #2 while other states retain style #1. This would be a bad idea since the template's purpose was to standardize the look of the navigation box for each state.
  2. An entire set of 50+ alternate state templates copied from the originals. Trying to keep the two sets of templates in sync would be a maintenance nightmare.
My reason for making the changes is that I noticed the template's creator had been trying to add the "v-d-e" links in edits on March 8th and 9th (see the #Tnavbar-header discussion above). While implementing that I also added "show/hide" because it seems to be an emerging standard for navigational templates to include both. However, if the consensus here is to leave out "v-d-e" and "show/hide", then that ought to apply to all states. Obviously I'm in favor of including it, but I'll save those comments for another time.
Zyxw 02:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in favor of retaining the show/hide and the v-d-e links. I am definitely opposed to having the 2 separate templates, it defeats the purpose of creating a consistent template for all the states to use. I also agree with Zyxw that it would lead to continous maintenance issues. VerruckteDan 14:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since there's been no further discussions and the consensus seems to favor maintaining the vde and show/hide, I've restored the coding. VerruckteDan 16:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to chime in late. But there is something inheritely wrong with creating navigation templates that are so large that people want to hide them. They start to include stuff that is not needed but nobody notices. I have a gripe about the US County template were it includes a map of where the county is but its not needed since its already in the articles. btw, is there a way to specify whether by default its shown or hidden when including it. It seems to be randomly open or close when I tried using one. --MarsRover 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The explanation of the parameter that controls whether a navbox is collapsed or expanded can be found near the bottom of the preceding section of this talk page and in the documentation on the template page. As for over-sized navboxes, I agree, they lose functionality. I don't know of any state navbox that is clearly oversized, but I haven't looked at them all recently. The show/hide feature is useful for articles with multiple navboxes. With multiple boxes, the US state navbox collapses, by default (as do any other box that uses a standard navbox template) to reduce their footprints and allow users to select to see the navbox they wish.
As for the maps being used in the county navboxes, some discussions are occurring on that talk page and I'd invite you to comment there. VerruckteDan 23:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I updated each of the individual U.S. state templates so they can be forced into expanded mode on a page by page basis. Using Colorado as an example, simply replace {{Colorado}} with {{Colorado|expanded}}. The word "expanded" could actually be replaced with any text other than "collapsed" (always collapsed) or "autocollapse" (the default mode: only collapsed when more than one navigation box of this type). -- Zyxw 05:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:US state navigation box 2

[edit]

Template:US state navigation box 2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. VerruckteDan 16:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broken templates?

[edit]

There's something wrong with the state templates - see Template:Arizona, Template:California and others, I assume. I've changed the Utah template back to the version that doesn't use the US state navigation box and it displays properly. — Zaui (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's fixed now. Thanks to whomever fixed it. — Zaui (talk) 17:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just what was the problem? Because I can't figure it out what the problem from the lastest change was unless it involved the font color. I'm attempting to simplify and conform all navboxes and templates so infomation where problems occur is very useful. —Dispenser 00:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't take a screen shot showing the problem, but it wasn't displaying properly - part of the code was visible at the top and the content was to the left and outside of the main box. As an experiment, you could restore the version that was in place at the time (this one, I believe) and have a look. I don't think it would disrupt things too much. — Zaui (talk) 15:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That helped since most people complain about font or margin sizes. The problem was that I had been tested the wrong parameters, so then the parsing engine (It has to do with the way table are handled) barfed since there were "{}" in it. —Dispenser 17:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

State=expanded

[edit]

Why can I no longer force the initial state of a US state navigation template to expanded? --Buaidh (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't seem to work either. --Buaidh (talk) 13:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know where you're trying to do this and I'll have a look. --CapitalR (talk) 09:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

[edit]

{{editprotected}}

Please move the ar. interwiki link inside the noinclude tags. --198.185.18.207 (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed from template - it belongs on doc page, and there's already one there for Arabic. If it's wrong, you can find the one from the template in the source of its old version. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centering title and left-align text

[edit]

I'd like to do a major upgrade to this template to fix a few problems with it. One major issue I have with it is that the title is not centered, due to the image at the top left (see Boston, San Jose, California, and Las Vegas, Nevada for some of the many examples of where this makes it look weird). I know how to fix this problem and center the title, but of course this makes all of the lists look funny, because they are centered and will not align with the title anymore. These lists really should be left-align, however, as that makes them much easier to read (graphic design 101: never center text except in headings and titles), links them with their group headings better, and fixes the centering problem.

Here's an example of the New York one, before and after (note that the new version makes use of some new {{Navbox}} features (namely, the titlegroup parameter) that will be available after May 1):

User:CapitalR/Navbox

Anyone have any thoughts or problems with me making these changes in a few days? --CapitalR (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Go for it. — Zaui (talk) 22:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The centering looks nice. The infinitesimal change in font size helps, too. Funny you mention graphic design 101, Alertbox this week is about (right) alignment. I trust your decision on whether groups as well as lists are left-justified. —SusanLesch (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support VerruckteDan (talk) 04:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I just made the change and all the templates seem to still work. For templates like Hawaii and American Somoa there is now some large whitespace on the right side of the template since left-align is used. I added the parameter "image" for people who may be unhappy about this...set |image = [[Image:...]] to use the parameter. I recommend setting it to be a map or something, similar to how Template:US county navigation box works. --CapitalR (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One problem with the current alignment: the capital isn't centered under the state name anymore on my computer. Is this a display problem with my computer, or is it this way with the template itself? As long as we're putting the state's name and the capital's name roughly in the middle of the top bar, I think it would be a lot better to have both centered on the same line. Nyttend (talk) 12:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, someone made a change recently that messed up the centering on IE; I reverted back to the previous version which seems to fix the problem. --CapitalR (talk) 20:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of

[edit]

Is there a way to change the "of" in the "State 'of' XXXXX" section so it reflects the text color that the template specifies rather then black. See Texas template


for the text parameter it is | text_color = #ffffff Thanks Oldag07 (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

seems fixed now. thanks! Oldag07 (talk) 03:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Limit of groups?

[edit]

Is there a limit to the amount of groups you can add to a template? Kristinpedia (talk) 23:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility improvement for visually-impaired readers

[edit]

{{editprotected}}

This template creates a box that is unnecessarily hard for the visually impaired to read, because it creates unnecessary wikilinks to state flags that cause screen readers to say things like "Flag of Arizona link State link of Arizona link ...". The flag is purely decorative, and as per WP:ALT #When not to specify it should not have a link so that it does not bother the screen reader (and the user). There's a simple fix, which has already been applied to the sandbox and tested.

Please install this trivial sandbox fix. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 07:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Let me know if there are any problems. Plastikspork (talk) 07:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update to accessibility improvement

[edit]

{{editprotected}} Since the previous comment, the Mediawiki software has been updated so that it now requires "|link=|alt=", instead of just "|link=", for the image to be marked as purely decorative. This template therefore now generates an image that has accessibility problems; I discovered this while checking the Pennsylvania State Capitol article, a featured article candidate. The Mediawiki software no longer supports purely decorative images that have title text (used in tooltips). This means that the |flag_caption= parameter is no longer supported, but that's not much of a loss since it is obvious that the purely decorative image is the flag of the state in question. Please install this sandbox patch; I have updated the documentation accordingly. Eubulides (talk) 20:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Standardizing this template's look

[edit]

I propose standardizing this template's look and feel with that of most other navboxes. In particular, this would move the large decorative flag from above the groups on the left to a small image in the title (many other navboxes use this style). In addition, it would make the group font slightly larger, and right-align it (again, standard). Finally, it would shrink the large title to a normal size and move the capital into the "above" navbox group.

This makes the template look much better when combined with other navboxes. It always looks funny to me when this one has the large flag image on the left and the large title font, and no other navboxes share this style. By making the style like other boxes, it will look much better.

Here's an example of what the change would look like:


What do others think of this change? Note that I also proposed something similar here for county navboxes. --CapitalR (talk) 09:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sounds like a good plan. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm going to be bold and make the change. If there's a lot of fallout, I can always revert myself. From past experience, people tend to get pretty protective of their own state's template look, so hopefully this won't be too painful. --CapitalR (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove flags

[edit]

{{editprotect}} Can you please remove the flags per WP:ICONDECORATION Gnevin (talk) 01:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was last discussed in April above and a consensus developed for the current version. Therefore I am declining this request for now and ask that you start a discussion on the matter. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Color logic

[edit]

{{editrequest}} Please change "background:{{{color|#cddeff}}};" to "{{#if:{{{color|}}}|background:{{{color}}};}}". The reasoning is that we should be using the default navigation box coloring unless it is specified otherwise. Thank you. 68.35.24.151 (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because there have been various edit wars about the colours of templates in the past (this recent discussion comes to my mind), your request may be viewed as controversial, especially if the "#cddeff" is being used deliberately by consensus. I would prefer an indication that this is not the case, before any changes are made. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, this would not actually change the color of any of the templates using this meta-template. Looking at all the templates calling this one, all have either a blank value for |color= or have explicitly specified the value. None have omitted this parameter completely, so this particular value was/is never being used (and this is even before the IP recently blanked many of them). The result of using a blank value is to say "background:" which is just bad coding and would be better to omit the value completely. So, I am going to go ahead an boldly make the change. Please ping me and/or revert if this has an unintended controversial consequence. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the IPs edits have been rolled back per WP:BRD, which was a good move given the numerous color edit wars. I am going to start some threads on the individual templates which have more odd color choices and I invite others to discuss if you are interested. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Please remove the piped link from 'capital' to List of capitals in the United States. This navbox is about an individual state. There is no reasonable likelihood that this US-wide link would be useful to someone looking at this navbox for an individual state. Colonies Chris (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 13 April 2013

[edit]

please update to this version of the same box, which (1) removes the extraneous div tags from around the lists, and (2) allows for alternative use of listX, which is compatible with {{navbox}}, and we are already allowing for groupX.

note that the double div causes a gap when you try to embed navbox subgroups. and this will fix that problem (see the example above which shows the spacing between group1 and group1a). Frietjes (talk) 00:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 07:33, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 27 September 2014

[edit]

Please add a |flag_border= parameter to allow {{Ohio}} to opt out of a border around its non-rectangular flag. See Special:Diff/627248151 for the proposed change. Thanks!  – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:11, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be a better idea to use a flag template for the flag icon? Coding like this automatically generates the state's flag and removes the border in the case of Ohio (assuming {{{state}}} is the state name, which it turns out to not be). I've also tried making the flagdeco template a fallback in case no image is specified (sandbox diff/testcase), since the available parameters may not correspond to the country data template title in all cases. SiBr4 (talk) 09:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've tested a version with flag templates only (which ignores the {{{flag_image}}} parameter altogether) for all states/territories and it doesn't change anything except for a few of them: for Ohio the border is removed as requested, for Utah the flag icon changes to the updated post-2011 flag, for USVI a flag icon is added where it currently has none, and for the historical Franklin and Jefferson a big redlink is added because they don't have country data templates. For the latter three the flag icon could be disabled again by setting a new parameter (|state_name= as it is called in the current sandbox version, though |flag_name= would be clearer) to "none". So a {{flagdeco}} icon being a fallback of a manual image with |flag_image= isn't actually necessary.
TL;DR summary of my above comments: using {{flagdeco}} for the flag image automatically removes the border for Ohio without noticeably changing the navboxes for other states, so I'm going to do that instead. SiBr4 (talk) 11:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that sounds good to me. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 23:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additional section needed

[edit]

Please add a section 9. Needed by the Florida infobox.

RSStockdale (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Below

[edit]

This template passes through the |belowclass= parameter but not |below=. Is that deliberate? It would be helpful to be able to add a footer linking to any book, category, outline, portal etc. relating to the state. Certes (talk) 15:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes:  Done Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[ec] I agree that this would be useful. Unless there is evidence of a consensus to leave it out, I suggest you assume that it was not intentional and fix it if you can. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:57, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Better late than never I guess. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:58, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove flags... again

[edit]

This recent MOS discussion came to the unanimous conclusion that flags and seals do not belong in navboxes, and they specifically cited navboxes that use this template as examples to form this conclusion. The flag code should be removed. This has also been proposed before and rejected on weak arguments. Thrakkx (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody has protested in 2 weeks, adding formal edit request. Thrakkx (talk) 00:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 03:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:US_state_navigation_box&oldid=1238203077"