Wikipedia talk:Page footers

message: For reference, I made a list of all of the country footers at Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries (including lists of dependencies and organizations).  I actually included each footer on the page so that they're easy to compare. -- Walt Pohl 22:40, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of country footers 

message: Is there any difference between a page footer and a series boxes apart from their positioning on the page ? Jay 09:53, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page footers and series boxes 

message: NATO footer CANNOT be removed from NATO member pages. It is a military alliance where the members are happy to blow the **** out of stuff for each other. It is extremely important to see clearly on each members page who are the allies of that country.
EU footer - again, it's not a federation, or military, but it's a pretty close union - I would argue that on each members page one should be able to see the other members.
I see no reason for the geographic footers, e.g. Europe.
Other footers are for specific places, like Counties/Provinces of Ireland, one per county page. Some other countries have such subdivisions. No worries about this. Of course, does one include them in the main country page???
Zoney 23:50, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Necessary footers

message: I agree with Lestatdelc about the clutter. Some of the geographical page footers are so dense and so large that the probability of someone finding something is small. Multiple page footers compounds the problem. One example I'm picking on this evening is Template:California, although I see lots of examples of super-dense footers.
I would suggest that the best practice is to put abridging lists in footers (for example, replacing a list of counties in the California footer with a single link to List of California counties).  This will make the footers far more usable (by being far shorter), at the cost of requiring one more click for those people who want to scan the list. The benefit is that we can include more diversity in each footer, as Lestatdelc says above, re naval ships.
-- hike395 08:10, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We could also be less ambitious in making footers. How about separate footers for cities and counties in CA? I prefer your suggestion though. --Jiang 20:01, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at my proposed minimalist alternative at MediaWiki Talk:California --- I'm curious to see what you think. Thanks! -- hike395 01:05, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

text: Came to a good compromise at MediaWiki Talk:California --- we decided to split the footer into two parts. This may be useful in other states. -- hike395 06:07, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abridging lists in footers is good 

message: Some days ago, I had change the width of a few page footers, because I think is better. Please see how would be better Genetics if the length is equal. Moreover when the page is graphically not balanced the length serves to balance visually it (see for example .
Sorry for my bad English.--Archenzo 10:44, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Width of Page footers

message: I'm concerned about people adding "Largest Cities" to the state MediaWiki boxes.  I don't argue with adding the cities, but some are, I think, going overboard.  For instance, for Template:Ohio I only added the very largest cities.  However, Template:Maine has more cities listed than counties!  We need to find some reasonable standardization on this. jaknouse 22:25, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to say >500,000, but I see that doesn't work for some states. Maybe limit to top 10, at most? Even a state as big as CA only has 20 listed, and probably half don't really need to be listed. Niteowlneils 23:05, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: MediaWiki:States

message: I'm wondering what principles govern the choice of material found in standard footers, such as 
Template:Alt-right footer. In general, is this based on the category structure, or is it a group decision, with the inclusion of the individual articles mainly subject to consensus? -- Quisqualis (talk) 06:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with deciding footer content