Template talk:Infobox U.S. metropolitan area

Change to MSA
Why the sudden change from CMSA (the no longer user "consolidated metropolitan statistical area") to MSA (metropolitan statistical area)? I, of course, realize that CMSA are no longer used, but they were renamed two years ago to CSA combined statistical areas, but CSA and MSA both exist and are different entities. I really this box should go back to how it was. KelleyCook 18:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * This infobox is based largely on List of United States metropolitan statistical areas by population. If CMSA was changed officially to CSA then both this infobox and the page previously cited should concider a change.


 * Copied from my talk page


 * Just to let you know, CMSAs are outdated and no longer used after November 2003. There are now CSAs, MSAs, and MDs. You should change "CMSA name" to "MSA name". Just a suggestion. If anything, please reply back here on your talk page. &mdash;RJN 01:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. I'll change it to MSA, which is what List of United States metropolitan statistical areas by population uses. —David618 01:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * —David618 20:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thumbnail
I tried to change the image to display as a thumbnail. I noticed this because when I was looking at Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex the first image displayed is huge, but should really be displayed as a 200px thumbnail. Can someone change the template so that this appears correctly? Thanks! -- RedPoptarts 23:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I just reverted for the time being to go see the display issue on DFW and didn't see anything wrong. &mdash;RJN 00:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Naming
Though I know some will disagree I'd like to suggest a couple of things:
 * 1) Why do we have to have a template entirely dedicated to US metro areas? Why not make this more generic to apply to any country?
 * 2) It seems to me a little dubious to use the the OMB MSA name as the title for the infobox. For one thing could argue legitimately that the MSA name is no more special than the CSA name for a given area (i.e. why not designate the CSA name as the primary name?). Apart from that though the OMB has no particular authority (outside federal statistics gathering) in naming these areas. In the absence of official names (metro areas are not legal entities and therefore have no official names) I would argue that the primary name used should be whatever the chamber of commerce or equivalent organization uses as its primary designation. For example the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce uses Chicagoland as its primary name for the area. This organization arguably speaks for the metro area more than any other so presumably Wikipedia should follow its naming practice. Certainly such practice is more in line with WP:LEAD.

--Mcorazao (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. Food for thought: The OMB principal cities for each MSA/CSA are subject to change from year to year. Though the data in an infobox may need annual updates there is something strange about changing the main title of the infobox just because the OMB changes the principal cities (i.e. this seems very artificial since usually the metro area itself will not generally change how it refers to itself). --Mcorazao (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggested revision:

For example,

Suggestion: Reimplement with Infobox settlement
Four of the five largest U.S. metro areas simply use Infobox settlement instead of this template. I suggest that this template should use that infobox underneath the hood for consistency and simplicity. —Mrwojo (talk) 00:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)