Template talk:Infobox UK place/Archive 12

Population query for Durham
There's currently a slow minor edit war going on in the Durham page over the population quoted in the infobox. Some people think the population in the infobox should be that of the urban area, whilst others think it should be the population of the entire local authority of the City of Durham (or, now that this has been abolished, the area formerly covered by the City of Durham which still has some status in electing the mayor). Unfortunately, I can't find anything in this infobox to state which population should be used. (And, confusingly, the infobox for Newcastle-upon-Tyne is a different one which allows both populations to be displayed.)

Can someone clarify once and for all which population should go in the infobox in the Durham article?

Thanks, Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 15:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What is the scope of the article? The pop should match that, but must be referenced - I see that the present value is unrefd. If clarification of the pop scope is required, you can use the population_ref field for both the date, source and scope, ie (City only, 2001 census). -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The scope of the article is the settlement itself. The former local authority (and current mayoral area) is covered in Durham (district). So does that mean that the population should be that of the city? Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well... yes, provided that the settlement and city are synonymous. Durham (district) may also be given population figures, which should be those of the district as a whole. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:UKGUIDE may help here. --Jza84 | Talk  00:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Maps for places in Scotland
The trap for places without a local map - see Template:Infobox UK place/NoLocalMap has suddenly gained hundreds of places in Scotland. Is that right; and how do we fix it. Can a bot change them all to counties, or does it have to be done by hand? Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Previously, all Scotland places used the general map of Scotland. Recently, some maps of more local scope have been created, which has allowed the mapping to use these for preference. For the background, see earlier thread on this page. As a result you will see that some articles now bear a local map (for instance, Dornoch has done so for about three weeks now). There are at least three reasons why this might not happen:
 * the infobox has an explicit Scotland
 * the infobox does not have unitary_scotland set to a valid value
 * a template like has not been created (see Category:Scotland location map templates). If absent, this suggests that a matching map (one like File:Highland UK blank map.svg) has not been created (see commons:Category:Locator maps of counties of Scotland).
 * If either 2 or 3 fail, it falls back to the general Scotland map.
 * As for fixing: check the infobox parameters, and, or like . -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to confirm that there are location map images and templates for all of GB now (all council areas in Scotland plus ceremonial counties in England and local authorities Wales too). Therefore point 3 above should not happen for any place in England, Scotland and Wales. The only real gap at present is Ireland (due to the fact I haven't looked for / found free data yet).--Nilfanion (talk)
 * There seems to be a problem where Aberdeen, which has the parameter City of Aberdeen (presumably to avoid linking back to itself), is not pulling in, yet is not showing at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox UK place/NoLocalMap. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * When I changed over Scotland to use the new maps, Dr. Blofeld asked for Aberdeen & Dundee to show the whole of Scotland rather than the unitary map. I could change that to show the detail maps if everyone would prefer. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:16, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Otherwise the dot locator shows in the middle of the Aberdeen map. The town is on the coast is it not? Scale was too big, this is why. Dr.  Blofeld  15:27, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Multiple place names
Apologies if I've overlooked an earlier post, but how do we add multiple places on the same map? And are the maps available for use in "location maps many"? Cavila (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not think that you can add multiple places on the infobox map but the maps are available for other uses. I have used one with Location map+ on List of civil parishes in the East Riding of Yorkshire so cannot see a problem with Location map many. Keith D (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's exactly what I've been looking for. Regards, Cavila (talk) 21:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Unlinking common words and units
This template seems to automatically wikilink common words such as 'Population' and 'Area' in subheadings, and also links common units of measure such as km2. Can this automatic linking be removed, per WP:OVERLINK? Colonies Chris (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I delinked area and population, will check on km2. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 00:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

OS grid ref and printability
I'm trying to print out Silverdale, Lancashire (to show off at WI meeting!) (now there's a thought - how many Wikipedia Women's Institute members are there?!), but the os grid ref appears in the printed version followed by the full Geohack URL, not a pretty sight. Can anything be done to suppress this? It doesn't seem helpful in the print version of a page - it's a link which is usefully clickable in the online version but doesn't provide source info etc as the references do. PamD (talk) 23:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Should be fixed now. Just refresh the page and then do a print preview. -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Isle of Skye UK location map.svg...
...has been created, FYI. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Church of England parishes and diocese
For settlements in England, I think it would be useful to add the diocese for towns and the parish for small villages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derbyadhag (talk • contribs) 20:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It might be useful to Anglican readers, but what about the Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, etc...? We shouldn't be favouring one religion above others. --  Dr Greg   talk  23:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Tweak for print
-->         List of places:

Should be replaced with

-->

This will remove the various "List of UK/England/Scotland/Northern Ireland/... locations" from the PDFs, where they are useless clutter, and will remain in the online version, where they are usefull. Thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 10:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, seems to be uncontroversial. ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Awesome, many thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:11, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

EU Parliament
Currently the EU Parliament shows up if the country parameter is set, so that's just about all the time. However, I think it would be better if it only shows up if at least one of the following is also set: Any objections to me making this change? -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * constituency_westminster
 * constituency_scottish_parliament
 * london_borough
 * constituency_welsh_assembly
 * You should not need a Westminster constituency to output the EU constituency. As long as the country & region is available (for England) then the EU constituency can be determined and should be output. Keith D (talk) 01:36, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The EU constituency shouldn't show on articles about places in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Their constituency boundaries are identical to their own boundaries. ~Asarlaí 22:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * But not all readers will know that; it is still useful and relevant information. I also agree with Keith D that there's no advantage in hiding the EU constituency simply because the Westminster or other constituency has not been set - showing it may well encourage people to add the missing information. Warofdreams talk 10:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If readers want to know what the EU constituency is, they only need to click on the UK constituency. There's no need to have both in the infobox (for Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland places). ~Asarlaí 18:38, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not intuitive - why would you expect the Westminster constituency to have details of the European Constituency? Keith D (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for others, but I would cetainly expect that. The Westminster constituency is the 'next step down'. For UK towns and villages, the EU constituency isn't vital info...the fact that the constituency and 'country' borders are identical further weakens the case for showing it (for Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland places). ~Asarlaí 19:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Most things aren't vital - but the EU constituency is certainly relevant. You could argue, on the same basis, that we needn't include counties, regions or nations, because they should be listed in the article on the district.  Best to provide all the relevant information. Warofdreams talk 12:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Caithness map
Dr. Blofeld has asked about using a more detailed map for places within the Caithness lieutenancy area. I've done the changes within the sandbox and an example is shown below.

Also, once implemented, all the places will need Caithness set before they will show the new map. Any comments before the changes are made? -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Other maps of areas of Highlands are on their way too. Its a very large region so can sensibly be split into area maps. The Scotland locator in the corner lets anybody known where it is. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  22:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)


 * There are now also maps for Lochaber and Nairn, so these could also have more detailed maps as well. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:46, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * These new maps are very useful, for such large unitary authorities. Warofdreams talk 10:21, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * One caveat is I'm not sure the map corresponds to the Lieutenancy area. The background is the 2007 wards, which may or may not match. Morven, Caithness is example of potential issue here - the mountain is in Caithness but is outside the highlighted area (as the 2007 boundary changes really messed things up).--Nilfanion (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * For the maps to work, the following params are checked in order: map_type, shire_district, lieutenancy_scotland and any matches as below will show the maps. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * {| class="wikitable"

! Param Value ! Map
 * Caithness
 * Caithness
 * Caithness UK location map.svg
 * Lochaber
 * Lochaber
 * Lochaber UK location map.svg
 * Nairn
 * Nairn
 * Nairn
 * Nairn
 * Nairn UK location map.svg
 * Badenoch and Strathspey
 * Badenoch and Strathspey
 * Badenoch and Strathspey UK location map.svg
 * Inverness
 * Inverness
 * Inverness UK location map.svg
 * Sutherland
 * Sutherland
 * Sutherland UK location map.svg
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty UK location map.svg
 * }
 * Inverness
 * Inverness
 * Inverness UK location map.svg
 * Sutherland
 * Sutherland
 * Sutherland UK location map.svg
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty UK location map.svg
 * }
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty
 * Ross and Cromarty UK location map.svg
 * }

Image captions: March 2011
The size of the image captions has been raised before but the discussions have died. I think the captions should be automatically small and bolded like they are on the Ireland placebox (example). It seems a lot of editors agree with me that the writing is a bit too big—editors have added tags to many articles where they're used. Thoughts? ~Asarlaí 00:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally I would prefer normal size text and get rid of the small as it is difficult to read, think of WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Keith D (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Small text image captions are used on Infobox settlement and elsewhere on this infobox. If accessibility is an issue then maybe we could use a size that's somewhere between "small" and "normal". However, I think things are evened-out if the small texted is bolded (see the example I posted above). ~Asarlaí 01:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Map labels: March 2011
The use of red dot labels has been raised before but the discussions have either died or haven't been dealt with. The last discussion was in February 2010—four editors (including myself) agreed that (most of the time) there's no need for a floating label beside the red dot. I suggest it be made optional. Thoughts? ~Asarlaí 00:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed ordering changes
Hi. I know people seem to prefer the settlement hierarchy the other way round compared to standard infobox but can we please move the OS grid reference and post code details to the bottom of the infobox and move the population down to the middle so the settlement hierarchy is at the top? Codes should really go at the bottom of infoboxes. The grid reference would look fine at the bottom and I think it would look a lot tidier.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Using non default maps
This is further to the Caithness map discussion above.

Some time ago I developed Template: Location map United Kingdom Brighton and Hove which has been used on quite a few articles to show locations of buildings, etc using a variety of infobox templates. Most infobox templates seem to have a parameter such as locmapin= or pushpin map= to define the map required. But Infobox UK Place does not seem to provide any way to override the default county-scale map, with the odd exception of Southampton (which is a rather ugly map anyway). I was trying to locate Brighton Marina but can only do so within the county which provides little clue as to the location of the UK place within a compact city boundary.

As User:Nilfanion is proposing to create district-scale maps from Ordnance Survey Open data, I expect there will be more demand for maps covering a smaller territory than a county, especially small settlements within a city area. Any reason why this can't be done? Sussexonian (talk) 22:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Population Density
With regards to the last edit on population density etc. I have noticed that on articles like Falkirk the "Density" part of the UK Infobox has become blank following the edit. Is there any way of rectifying this as I have no clue. 22:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cal Umbra (talk • contribs)
 * Apologies about that - I missed a } off the template code, which broke the logic. I've fixed it now, and everything should now be working properly. Mike Peel (talk) 07:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Inset maps
I think its time we reviewed what exactly these should be used for. My natural inclination is to say no more than 1 inset on a given map, and that inset should show the subject area in the most relevant containing area. 2 or more insets is overloading the image IMO.

This means:
 * 1) For counties, show the location in the country
 * 2) For English districts, show the location in the county
 * 3) Use judgement for sub-district level maps: A map for central Glasgow might be better with a within-Scotland not a within-Glasgow map, whilst a Bradford (the settlement not the district) map may be better within W Yorks.

I've also noticed an interesting discussion at Template talk:Location map (and the following threads). I like that method of adding the inset, as its much more flexible. Individual projects can choose to use the inset or not, different articles/templates can use different insets - sometimes within country may be better than within county and so on. As long as the base map has sufficent room for an inset (all mine do), there is nothing lost for the reader. Could have a look at if that can be done with the UK templates?--Nilfanion (talk) 08:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request
Please can we delete the "& nbsp;" next to the "nomap" condition. It seems to be producing extra whitespace on pages like Earlsdon.--Kotniski (talk) 10:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, well spotted. ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

references?
is there a way to add references to the infobox? ading them in the normal way seems to be break it--Lord Aro (talk) 11:13, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Which field? Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 'london_distance_mi' and 'london_distance_km' --Lord Aro (talk) 09:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Those two valuers are handled in Template:Infobox UK place/dist and passed straight to Template:Convert; and fails there. I think the only way to add refs is to add another parameter; but do we really need refs on those two values?. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * There is also a london_distance parameter. The ref could be added to that. -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Demonym field
Please could we add a demonym field to this infobox (see Infobox U.S. state for a related Infobox which has one). SP-KP (talk) 15:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, I think that's a really good idea. (Of course, for most of the UK, especially the midlands and north, we could save editors time by settting the default to "Shell-suit clad chav") --Simple Boba.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 19:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ulster Scots place names
I know there is already support in this template for Scots language in the scots_name tag. I wonder if it would be useful to support a varient for Ulster Scots for Northern Irish places? --Chuunen Baka (talk  • contribs) 19:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ulster Scots isn't a separat language; it's the dialect of Scots spoken in Ulster. If Scots is changed to Ulster Scots (on NI articles) then Irish would hav to be changed to Ulster Irish. Likewize, we'd also hav to make fields for Insular Scots, Northern Scots, Central Scots and Southern Scots. I don't see the point. ~Asarlaí 19:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

"Use a link"
It seems this template unconventionally requires a link in certain fields (such as 'lieutenancy_england') to function properly. I am not sure what the intention of this is, but it is unsatisfactory and potentially confusing to users. It would seem eminently preferable to either incorporate the link into the template code, or to make it work without the link. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Historic county parameter
The template could do with a parameter to allow the marking of historic counties, due to the various changes that have taken place over the years. Mjroots (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the traditional counties changed so many times that, for many places, it would be hard to decide where they were. Do you mark their county prior to the revisions of 1974?  Or 1965?  Or 1888?  Or 1844?  If you go back before 1844, what about places that were in different counties for different purposes, or whose county was disputed?  And what about the counties corporate?  All the changes are interesting, but best saved for the text of the articles, where they can be discussed in appropriate detail. Warofdreams talk 23:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It would only need the single parameter, any changes can be documented by use of line breaks, and dates added. The problem is that many articles where places have changed counties don't mention the fact. I've even known editors to "correct" historic counties to the modern ones. Liverpool was not in Merseyside during the Second World War, it was in Lancashire. At least with that article the historic county is mentioned in the lede. Mjroots (talk) 05:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I am with Warofdreams on this. The changes should be detailed in the text and not cluttering up the infobox with such detail. Keith D (talk) 11:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Different map scales
In general, this template uses county-scale maps for the background. There are also more detailed maps available at the city-scale, but I'm not sure if any use is made of them via this template. I wonder if we could improve on this: Enabling these features will require additional maps, but I can produce these if there is demand. If the features are wanted, we could start working something up in a sandbox while the maps are being produced.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) District-scale mapping is useful for specific articles (eg a map in Ribble Valley matching the one at Lancashire). But would it be useful to allow this template to call district-level maps, or even default to them? IMO county-scale is the best default for settlement-articles, but the option to use other scales could be useful.
 * 2) Could we enhance the infobox to provide more maps? I don't mean displaying 2 or 3 maps at once, but 1 at a time and let the reader select the one they want via Javascript. For example, look at the infobox map in fr:Paris. The template used allows the reader to switch between a political and a relief map. We could provide a similar feature here, and/or a "zoom in / zoom out" option: Allowing the reader to zoom in to district-level or out to country-level from the default.

Dial_code: exchange

 * 1) Can we have an option to specify a town's telephone exchange. eg. Elstree is designated LWELS.
 * 2) Any reason why dial_codes can not highlight the actual exchange. London's 020 covers hundred of exchanges, for example Borehamwood uses 020 8953 and 020 8207 --Iantresman (talk) 11:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the BT exchange exchange code word would confuse many readers as it is a relatively obscure concept for a general purpose geographic infobox. The heading does link to Telephone numbers in the United Kingdom so perhaps there could be an explanation and link to www.samknows.com in that specialist article. People wanting to know exchanges will usually be searching for a specific postcode (not placename) to identify the exchange for their own broadband connections, so listing the information in placename articles would provide little practical benefit.
 * Exchange dial subcodes are obsolescent as non-BT numbers are added from ranges covering the entire geographic area of the STD code. Also, in London, the 020-3 range is being allocated across the whole code area, further diluting the geographical correspondence. Thirty years ago, a sub-division would have been meaningful and maintainable in many areas, but I think it would now cause more confusion than enlightenment.
 * — Richardguk (talk) 17:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)