Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/Archive 2

=2005=

Section Header Culture?
Because most states have a somewhat unique culture, I'm considering adding a "Culture" heading to the U.S. States that will enable the incorporation of information about everyday life in the various states. Such information might include notes about distinctive music, foods, festivals, and traditions tied to geography and climate. For example, the Louisiana culture section might include a discussion of the Cajun and Creole lifestyle. Utah's would emphasize the role of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Hawai'i's would focus on the cultural traditions of the ethnic Hawai'ian people. Kentucky's might discuss the role of bluegrass music. I might make "professional sports teams," where applicable, a subset of the broader "Culture" section.


 * Generally I would discourage the idea. Louisiana can link to Cajun in a see also. Ditto for Utah, although LDS gets discusssed in History. Hawaii is a unique case, and probably gets a link to the article about the Kingdom of Hawaii, which needs a culture section. If needed, you could also discuss its culture (with a heading) where the template shows Miscellaneous Topics. Thanks for the thoughjts! Lou I 16:38, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

25 Richest Places in Blank
I'm not sure what to do with the "25 richest places." Most of these rich places are rather small communities. I wonder why they didn't include the "25 poorest places" too for a sense of balance. User:Dufekin

I agree, anonymous. How are the 25 richest places in a state important? And if we are all going for the trend of wealth, why not balance it out with the 25 Poorest Places in Blank? And I personally do not think that it should be a link anywhere either. I guess if it had to be in there, it should still reside in Important Cities and Towns; it definitely does not fit the state Economy or statistical Demographics. --Iamunknown (Talk)08:55, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Another vote for dropping the Richest places. My sense of balance is not offended, since we don't list smallest towns to make up for important cities but going strictlty by census zone demographics tends to pick out small suburbs. Beter to just drop the idea. Lou I 16:25, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

units in the infoboxes
A couple of people have suggested at template talk:Infobox U.S. state that the use of metric rather than English measurements in the articles about U.S. states is unexpected and that the infobox should be extended to include both. The articles for a few states already include both, although perhaps somewhat surreptitiously (see Kansas and Missouri). Anyone know the history behind the choice to use metric, and should we explicitly include both? -- Rick Block 03:43, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Do it!
 * Then fix the damn wrong numbers you have.
 * If you see smoke rising from your monitor, it's because I'm seething. Need blood pressure pills before I proceed.  Gene Nygaard 13:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * To do this, we'll need the English measurements for all states. Can we compile the list here?  I believe we need to fill out the following table for each state (total, land, and water area are in List_of_U.S._states_by_area, so no need to repeat here).  Is http://www.netstate.com/states/index.html a good enough source for width/length/height (USGS has max/min elevation at http://www.usgs.gov/)?  Definitive population density is available at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/.  -- Rick Block 04:28, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That's a lot of nonsense. Whoever did these figures in the first place started out with the figures in miles and feet, and converted them--incorrectly in most cases.  Just have whoever did that dig out the old files.
 * What really made me angry was that the at least one of the two files that you have been grousing most about (Missouri or Kansas), has figures in miles and kilometers which do not agree with each other, and if I remember right, in the other one they do agree but both are wrong.
 * The area, land area, water area, and population density are available in one file from the U.S. Census.
 * What do you mean by "width" and "length"? That conceptual problem is a bigger hurdle than anything else.  It's not too bad for Colorado, but even then there are difficulties, and several possible choices.  But what does it mean for Florida?  For Alaska?  For Hawaii?  How do you reconcile the current figures for Massachusetts with those for Connecticut?
 * Highest and lowest elevations are easy to get. Do we need some imprecise estimate of "mean" elevation?
 * You'd also need more columns in your tables, to get the metric measurements right this time around. Gene Nygaard 04:48, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I traced the Colorado article back to it's beginning and found the edit that added the measurements (this one). The original measurements were added in km not miles. I have no idea where User:Sfmontyo got the numbers or if they were converted.  His talk page has had no activity since last December.  I would expect that the tables were populated by a variety of contributors using data from perhaps a variety of sources.  I'm suggesting fixing this, using authoritative data, and my guess is that this would be a whole lot less work than chasing down whoever added the original data.  Width and length are in the table and I assume they mean maximum extent in the east-west and north-south directions (and looking at the values width apparently means north-south and length east-west, which seems odd, but whatever).  If you know of an authoritative source other than USGS for highest/lowest elevations please let me know.  I don't much care about mean elevation, but somebody at some time thought it was useful (and managed to find numbers from somewhere - I looked a bit and didn't find this at USGS - if we preserve this we should cite the source).  I'm not sure I understand your comment about more columns to get the metric measurements "right".  Are you suggesting we update the existing measurements in all the articles by converting from English measurements (and presumably including the new conversions in the table below)? -- Rick Block 14:25, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Filled in width, length, and mean elevation in Rick Block's table. I used as a source (for lack of a better one). --MJCdetroit 19:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * HI is a group of islands

Can we add the square acreage of the state to the main state stat box? For instance, Rhode Island is 1214 mi sq and that is 776,900 sq acres according to google http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1214+miles+squared+in+acres --216.7.248.254 16:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC) - drach(cole) 6/27/2006 Jun. 27, 16:30:54 UTC
 * What's a sq acre? You mean acre. Anyway, the answer is no.  Can you imagine how large the number (of acres) would be for Alaska?  For RI, just put the acreage in the footnotes section. --MJCdetroit 17:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S. I guess you couldn't because there was not a footnotes field in the template. So, I added a footnotes section and edited the RI article for you.--MJCdetroit 18:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

template for U.S. federal representatives
I'm attempting to obviate the need for a template under discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:Current U.S. Senators by creating a standard template, perhaps one for each state, similar to Template:CO-FedRep. I started an initial discussion about this at Wikipedia_talk:Avoid_using_meta-templates, since one way to do this would be by using a meta-template. This is not exactly about the state articles, but seems sufficiently related that folks who watch this page might be interested. -- Rick Block 04:02, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Is this the right forum to discuss this idea (anyone have any better ideas)?
 * 2) Assuming yes, can we reach a consensus that a template such as Template:CO-FedRep has sufficient value that it's worth generalizing this to all states?


 * If you people who were discussing it on the other page have a rough consensus that it should be moved here, then move that talk here and leave only a link there, so people aren't jumping back and forth and commenting both places. Gene Nygaard 13:19, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am a new comer to this discussion. I was in the middle of creating the state federal representative template for the different states when ‘Rick Block’ drew my attention to this discussion. The solution I am working on is similar to one that was discussed here before. There would be 51 templates for the 50 states. One central template Template:U.S.A. State Congressional Delegation would be used for formatting purposes. And templates like Template:AL-FedRep, Template:AK-FedRep , #Template:AZ-FedRep , Template:AR-FedRep would be used for individual states. This would require 50 edits every two years + edits for each senator / representative who is voted out /in. I believe this is the most elegant and easy to manage solution. --DuKot 00:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This is my preference as well. The issue with this approach is that any change to the central template requires the software to trundle through all 50 templates and all articles including any of these templates (presumably 535 of them) marking them as uncached.  If the total number of references (direct or indirect) is in the multiple tens of thousands range I'm absolutely sure this would be a problem.  In this case, I'm not so sure. -- Rick Block 01:44, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * How many times are we going to change the central template? My prediction is 10-20 edits the first two weeks. Then may be one edit every other week. It is not likely to be a great performance issue. --DuKot 05:41, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Flag of Georgia
The template on Georgia (U.S. state) links to Flag of Georgia, but the real place it should go to is Flag of Georgia (U.S. state). Can this be fixed? Felix the Cassowary 13:34, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, although it's moderately painful because the template implementation provides no mechanism for supplying default values for parameters. Perhaps the most straightforward solution is to add a new parameter to the template to be used as the link and edit all 50 state articles to supply this parameter.  I'll do this.  -- Rick Block 14:16, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Fixed. -- Rick Block 15:04, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Apparently this was unfixed as I just subst:ed the template to make it work after someone complained to the help desk. Please figure out what went wrong and make the code look pretty again. WAvegetarian (talk) (email)   (contribs) 23:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

State flag icons
As a side effect of fulfilling requests for country flag manipulation, state flag icons are now available. For example, Alaska with an "AK" label is generated by  USA-AK . Alternatives such as  USA-Alaska  can be created; one has to tell the template the name of the flag file ("Alaska_flag_large.png"), the name of the Wikipedia article ("Alaska"), and the text label ("AK"). The alias tables used by {(tl|country_flag}} may be of interest for other templates. (SEWilco 21:04, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Andrwsc 21:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Updated...:...to reflect the planned change to flag.
 * undefined or undefined to display  undefined
 * or to display
 * undefined to display undefined

undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined

The original names, which used abbreviations which included the country, were chosen to isolate state names from the country namespace. "USA-NM" is less likely to collide with a country name than "New Mexico". I chose the abbreviation pattern to avoid problems until someone decided a different name pattern should be used. (SEWilco 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC))

width, length, mean elevation
Does anyone watching this page know where the numbers in the state articles for width, length, and mean elevation came from (originally)? I'm attempting to collect enough data to list all the measurements in each state's infobox in both SI (metric) and standard (miles, feet) units. Alternatively, if anyone knows an authoritative (e.g. USGS) source for these measurements, please let me know. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:46, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive
The related articles American Empire, History of Minnesota, National Football League and Space program of the United States have been listed to be improved on This week's improvement drive. To support one of these articles you can add your vote there. Also, Rodgers and Hammerstein is nominated at the Biography Collaboration. --Fenice 07:15, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Template standardization?
Hi all. I am pretty sure that it's standard practice to allow a wikiproject to establish standards for things related to their topics. Is there a standardized state template for, say, counties/cities/MSAs? The reason I ask is because we've gotten into a discussion about which template to use for Texas. I'd appreciate knowing whether this has been standardized or not. And if not, as interested parties you may want to weigh in yourself on the debate at Template talk:Texas. Thanks. · Katefan0(scribble) 20:31, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

User talk:Alexwcovington/ND Wikiproject proposal
I'm requesting comment on a WikiProject on North Dakota. Any help would be greatly appreciated. -- A l e x W C ov i n g t o n  (talk) 06:50, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Demographics data
I am currently working on a mini-project to improve and expand the demographics data on the state articles because they are inconsistent in appearance (and limited in detail) across articles. Refer to my project page User:Moverton/Projects/U.S. state demographic tables for details. I have assembled the initial templates for the Race tables, but will add more notes once I have assembled the data. &mdash;Mike 21:48, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Puerto Rico
I propose that Puerto Rico and other US posessions (like Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands and etc.) should have the State infobox template instead of using the country infobox template since they are not independent countries. You can see that Puerto Rico has an USPS abbreviation as PR, and an ISO 3166-2 code as US-PR. See http://www.mindspring.com/~mjfriedman/countrysubentity.txt for more information or ISO 3166-2

There is a current dispute happening in the Puerto Rico article. We need your advice and consensus to solve this issue, I remember seeing a user mention that US Territories should use the State infobox with some exemptions like "date of annexation" and etc. Have a happy holidays! --68.235.131.36 02:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)