Template talk:New Castle County, Delaware

message: I propose that this template include only Unincorporated Communities with a Census Class Code of U6 (A populated place that is not a census designated or incorporated place having an official federally recognized name), and that have a GSA Code.  This would limit the list to:
*Christiana
*Collins Park
*Henry Clay
*Kirkwood
*Marshallton
*Minquadale
*Montchanin
*Ogletown
*Port Penn
*Rockland
*St. Georges
*Silverbrook
*Stanton
*Talleyville
*Winterthur
*Yorklyn 
Otherwise, this template could easily become very cumbersome if it is expanded to include nearly 400 populated places recognized by the GNIS. This proposal would exclude the following, which should be added to a (yet to be developed) list of populated places in New Castle County, Delaware:
*Blackbird 
*Centreville
*Elmhurst
*Gwinhurst
*MacDonough
*Manor
Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 15:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is meant to be a navigational template for all municipalities and unincorporated communities in the county that have articles.  It's one thing — and a bad idea at that — to have links to all communities regardless of whether they have articles, but all county templates nationwide link to all known unincorporated communities.  Nyttend (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see this list and reconsider whether its really still appropriate to include all known unincorporated communities. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 12:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why?  Someone created those articles, so we should link to them.  That's the very point of this template.  Nyttend (talk) 13:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

text: It makes sense to list communities on a navigation template meant for navigating between communities.  You created articles on many of these places — why did you do it if they're not real communities?  As long as there are articles, we link to them for the sake of navigability.  By trying to remove some of these, you're trying to make this template different from every other county nationwide — there's absolutely no good reason to do that.  Nyttend (talk) 01:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I created these articles because we refused to delete :Gwinhurst, Delaware.  If a non-notable, 8-street housing development like Gwinhurst gets an article, then so do the other 400 just like them. Your comment below about ignoring redlinks will be obsolete when I finish creating the rest. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 03:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In other words you don't believe that Gwinhurst should have an article, but you create tons more just like it, except far shorter?  Confused.  Nyttend (talk) 23:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The community has spoken in favor of having articles on every populated place, regardless of how non-notable they are.  I'm finished with the ones in :Brandywine Hundred, and until directed otherwise, will continue to make my way through the rest of New Castle County. The only point I'm making is that in doing so, this template is rendered ridiculous. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 04:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The community has not spoken in favor of having articles on all populated places — a year or more ago, there was a proposal to have a bot create articles on hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of communities worldwide, and it was rejected.  It's more like "permitting articles on...".  Nyttend (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unincorporated Communities 

message: I would like editors to weigh in on these two options:
*Version 1 - limited to actual communities with a GSA code
*Version 2 - expanded to include every entry in the USGS GNIS with a Census Class Code of U6
Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 13:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Should the Unincorporated Communities be limited to those with a GSA code?