Template talk:County

message: :Template:Cheshire is based on this template.
There is also a Cheshire portal that is being started and we would like to add a link to the portal to the Cheshire template.  This has been done (see :Template:Cheshire), but I do not think it looks great, and looks worse on actual pages (e.g. Northwich).  A better way to do it would be to change this template to allow a new 'field' of Portal.  I would suggest it has a value of the associated portal's name.  This would then generate a link to the portal within the template, perhaps within the 'header', using portal.svg ()?
:Template:Cornwall, not based on this template, have done something similar and this kind of look is what I would like to achieve within this template.
I would have a crack at it myself, but as it affects a much wider audience outside Cheshire, I feel it needs to be discussed first.
Opinions anyone?  Pixie2000 (talk) 13:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a good suggestion, well worthy of discussion. I would support the addition of such a field.  DDStretch  (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why the county template cannot be redesigned to look like the Cornwall one. The addition of a "Topics" list seems like a good idea. -- Phildav76 11:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I've tried to re-position it, or put it at the end, and so on, but got mixed up, and so put it back roughly where it was before I tried to edit it.  DDStretch  (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portal Link

message: Several counties have their own flags and the option to include them on the template would be useful. Is it possible to add a field that will display the flag in a similar way to Template:Cornwall? Timrollpickering 16:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flags 

message: Any objection to me changing "Cities and towns" to "Major settlements"? --Jza84 |  Talk   02:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest this template list cities & towns separately instead of mixed in a single section. Why? Because of the way bold is used to highlight cities. First: this usage isn't explained. Second: it interferes with the way that the article name is automatically emboldened when the template is included in an article. (However a change like this will cause backward compatibility issues with all existing uses of this template.) For the same reason I'd like "List of civil parishes in " not to be bold either. I'd also be happy to go along with Jza84's suggestion provided all cities are de-emphasised. --Dr Greg (talk) 17:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Settlements 

message: The doc needs to be moved to the doc subpage. --Yarnalgo talk to me 05:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doc to subpage 

message: Please add an Adr microformat to this template, by changing:

|title  = [[Ceremonial counties of England|Ceremonial county]] of [[{{{countyname}}}]]

to:

|title  = [[Ceremonial counties of England|Ceremonial county]] of <span class="adr"><span class="region">[[{{{countyname}}}]]</span></span>

Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Jza84 |  Talk   00:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 08:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add microformat (editprotected) 

message: Back in August I reaised the issue of Canals in this template at WP:UKGEO getting only 1 responce and they felt that a separate section should be used. I therefore propose to add a cl section to cover canals after the rivers section unless there is any objections. Keith D (talk) 16:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Canals

message: Just a note that I've been bold and added an additional field for Statutory City Regions. They are only being used on a trial basis for the Manchester City Region and Leeds City Region, but others are likely to follow. The field can be editted out at any time - just give me a nudge if any feels there are concerns with consensus (though I hope I've judged it right that this is a small and progressive change only). --Jza84 |  Talk   16:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statutory City Region 

message: In counties where the List of civil parishes in... has been upgraded (all the metropolitan counties plus Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Cheshire, Cornwall, Cumbria and Lancashire), the pages are no longer purely a list.  In addition, the criteria globally have changed, and "lists" are no longer required to be titled List of...  Consequently, those pages have been moved to Civil parishes in..., which causes problems with the bold highlight on this template.
In order to solve this, do we:
*(1) Change the parameters to highlight either List of civil parishes in... or Civil parishes in...;
*(2) Retitle all the pages, including those not yet upgraded, and change the parameters on this template;
*(3) Revert the changes already made, until all the lists can be retitled together, and then change the parameters on this template;
*(4) Adopt the suggestion of Dr Greg three years ago (above) and do away for the bold highlight altogether.
Skinsmoke (talk) 18:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of civil parishes 

message: I've improved this template's emitted (microformat) metadata. Please apply the changes in the Sandbox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I also moved Template:County/Sandbox to Template:County/sandbox because various templates - such as  and the  above - expect a lowercase "s" when generating links (see here). --Redrose64 (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch; and thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microformat tweaks 

message: I would like to add the text "in England" (or perhaps using a coma, as ", England") after "Ceremonial county of Foo". The markup should be in England or , England, respectively. 
Also, what about moving the "List of civil parishes in Warwickshire" to , and dropping the words "See also"? If that's not done, perhaps we should drop the word "Major" from "Major settlements". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed changes 

message: Addition.  I wonder if it may be possible to insert an extra parameter please of |Flag= ?   is what I would like to be able to insert and other users may also have flags of counties to insert.  Thanks very much in advance. Adam37 (talk) 21:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: This seems like a reasonable request, but we need some actual code before we can update the template. The admins who patrol protected edit requests are not (usually) coders for hire. :) Could you work up a version in the template sandbox? If you need any help with the coding you could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates. Best — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added this to the sandbox. Please apply the changes. Calhoun talk 21:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  shouldn't the flagicon be at the start of the title, to avoid visual disruption of the text? Frietjes (talk) 17:12, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Closedmouth (talk) 01:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 4 December 2012 

message: Not sure where to find this guideline or even ask the question . . .  In USA county descriptions, the adjacent counties often are listed.  So, in a series of rectangular counties (as found in portions of West Central Texas), is contact at a mutual corner considered "adjacent"? (Or, is Colorado "adjacent" to Arizona?) I'm not an attorney but think in oil & gas land law, such point contact does qualify for "contiguous." Casey (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how it should work in the USA, but this is a UK county template, and there are no examples of counties meeting at a single point only (although Rutland/Cambridgeshire/Lincolnshire/Northamptonshire is blisteringly close to this). Bazonka (talk) 10:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjacent county definition 

message: Some settlements in the county templates are in bold text, but this is done inconsistently. In some counties, only the cities are bold, and in others it seems to be the major settlement in each district. There's no explanatory text. In my opinion it should just be cities (or nothing). What do others think? Bazonka (talk) 10:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: My preference (in any navbox) is not to embolden anything, simply because, when transcluded in an article, the name of the article (within the navbox) is automatically emboldened, so any additional bold text detracts from that. In any case, there's no point in highlighting some items unless it is clear to the reader why they are highlighted. -- Dr Greg  talk  13:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about having cities in bold italics, which would be distinct from the bolding applied when transcluding from an article? This would also need the heading of Major Settlements to be appended with "(cities in bold italics)" or similar. I guess this could be omitted from counties without cities. Bazonka (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Revisiting this after 2 years... I've changed my mind about bold italics - I think just italics will work. I've added text to the template, and I'll now go through all of the county templates to remove bolding, and to add italics where required. If anyone knows how to make the text about italics only appear when cities are present, then that'll be great! Bazonka (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bold text for settlements