Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Location/United Kingdom

message: It's an English county. Its not a matter of opinion, its fact - "Cornwall (Cornish: Kernow) is a county on England's south west peninsula that lies to the west of the River Tamar". It should be in the England section. Why isn't it? -  • Dussst • T | C 21:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Guilty as charged, M'lud :-) --Portnadler 15:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cornwall 

message: I've altered the templates for those userboxes listed on this page to bring their style in line with the standard format for such things. -- Scjessey 19:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox format 

message: :::Hayter, this is one such (annoyed) user who is now miscategorized.  You should have created new userboxes instead of changing existing ones.  Wikipedians don't add userboxes to their pages and expect the description to be significantly changed from under their feet.  Gsd2000 01:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The United Kingdom userbox was out of sync with every other country's user box, which say "this user comes from". A new userbox should be created for "lives in the United Kingdom".  I reverted the UK one, mainly out of annoyance that a handful of users had a vote and thought better to change it.  What about all the other users like me who didn't have this on their watchlist? Gsd2000 00:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gsd2000, what I have done to the templates is in line with the consensus of those who have posted here. I have included a link to this discussion in every edit summary, posted bold notices on the concerning talk pages and when I moved one template, I also edited the pages of those users who displayed it so they would not be associated with the wrong group. More than this however, what I have done is in line with WP:UB, which aims to create a standard for all userboxes, which includes naming conventions. If there is a consensus against this, then that's one thing, but given this discussion and the attempt to find the best solution, for you to revert the changes in opposition to those others who have spoken on the issue is wrong. - Hayter 10:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't edit my page.  I only discovered this after I happened to check my user page.  Four votes is not a consensus, and I see that at least one user, Scjessey, agrees with me.  I am seriously annoyed at this, and at you.  If anything you have gone against what WP:UB says because every other country user box outside the British ones is different.     .  The least you can do is be polite and point me in the direction of a "comes from the United Kingdom" userbox.  As Scjessey says below, "every effort must be made to inform affected users before changes are made, and only when suitable alternatives are available".  I find your meddling and the manner in which you have gone about this totally unwelcome.  Gsd2000 12:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You are attempting to put words in my mouth. I never claimed to have edited your page. I have not proposed that four votes represent the united wish of those using the boxes, simply that the stated consensus here agrees with the proposal. Interest, disagreement and perhaps confusion can be expected with something such as this, but your stated "serious annoyance" is either an exaggeration or an indicator that you're taking this far too seriously or failing to understand the proposal's nature. No one here is saying you cannot have an accurate userbox on your page, but for future simplicity, you should change two of the words you type to get it to appear. If you disagree with this in theory beyond the irritance of having to change something then that's fine, everyone here respects your right to do so. But to say you're seriously annoyed about this... or even me personally sounds ridiculous and isn't helped by the use of phrases such as "meddling." These changes weren't made on a personal whim and were openly discussed in the most logical place weeks before any changes took place. Clearly, they're still being discussed - this isn't an underhand ploy to take userboxes away from some people and if it turns out that a majority are against the idea then they'll of course be reverted. I can understand your interest in this proposal but there's no need for hyperbole or insults on your part. - Hayter 16:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You said, and I quote, "I also edited the pages of those users who displayed it so they would not be associated with the wrong group".  You didn't edit mine!  I discovered that it had changed by chance.  Changing the semantics of a userbox is wrong.  It's not like editing an article - you are changing a statement that a Wikipedian has made about themselves on their user page.  My irritation purely stems from the fact that I had a factually incorrect userbox on my page for a while and I was unaware of this, then I discover that an underwhelming four - four! - Wikipedians had voted to make this change on behalf of several hundred users.  It may be a small issue to you, but there is a point of principle here.  It's like going into someone's house and swapping their "Tony Welmington, Labour" window poster for "Margeret Biggins, Conservative".  Gsd2000 19:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: And as an FYI for anyone else reading, Template talk:User United Kingdom#Content Change. - Hayter 18:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hayter: you need to consult WP:WIN#Wikipedia is not a democracy. Just because three people say one thing, and one says another, that doesn't constitute a binding consensus. I can't really believe that I'm getting into an argument over user boxes - it's not very encyclopaedic - but it seems clear to me that once a thing has been in place for 3 months, and numerous people have added it to their pages, it becomes vandalistic to start altering it. Why not create a new template if you want one? I don't see the issue with that. — SteveRwanda 06:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page shows a stated consensus, which is all I've claimed to work from. Neither you nor I can guess the thoughts of those who haven't said anything, so logically the option is to go with those who have spoken. Their thoughts are above. - Hayter 13:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You ignored the reservations of the "Agree with RESERVATIONS" vote.  There is now my vote to disagree.  SteveRwanda disagrees.  That leaves 3 votes for, 1 vote for with reservations, and 2 against.  This is no longer a consensus.  The status quo ante bellum should prevail.  Gsd2000 14:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not ignored anything, in fact I have read this entire conversation a number of times to confirm my thoughts are correct on this. Scjessey's reservation is about notification. Short of individually noting each of the hundreds of people that use these templates, I have made every effort to notify people of this proposal, including links in my edit summaries and notices on the talk pages. It may be that Scjessey feels this is not enough and I can understand that point of view, even if I disagree with it, but I have not ignored his comments, and as it stands, he is still on record as agreeing. I'm better at English than maths, but I'm fairly sure that's a 2:1 ratio in favour of the proposal. - Hayter 13:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GSD2000

message: Irritatingly, I've only just considered something regarding the counties. Whilst England>English, Wales>Welsh etc. all work fine and are good for seperating categories, how do you apply that to counties? I'm sure some have local nicknames but nothing so obvious as the above. As such, I still think  templates should indicate location rather than "coming from," and so if a person wants to indicate for example, that they originally come from Yorkshire, but no longer reside there, they would use something akin to  or {{User Yorkshire born)). I feel now is the best time to work out a consensus for such templates so you don't have endless variations springing up in future for what are similar templates e.g. , {{User of Leeds descent)), . I think my vote would go with . 
Regarding notification for new users wishing to use one, a note on the page similar to that found at  should suffice, with something akin to, "This template is designed to reflect those living in County. Users originally from County but no longer residing there should see ." - Hayter 16:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''From'' County