Template talk:US state navigation box

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.  VerruckteDan 16:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:US state navigation box 2}}

message: There's something wrong with the state templates - see Template:Arizona, Template:California and others, I assume.  I've changed the Utah template back to the version that doesn't use the US state navigation box and it displays properly. — Zaui (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it's fixed now. Thanks to whomever fixed it. — Zaui (talk) 17:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just what was the problem?  Because I can't figure it out what the problem from the lastest change was unless it involved the font color.  I'm attempting to simplify and conform all navboxes and templates so infomation where problems occur is very useful.  —Dispenser 00:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't take a screen shot showing the problem, but it wasn't displaying properly - part of the code was visible at the top and the content was to the left and outside of the main box. As an experiment, you could restore the version that was in place at the time (this one, I believe) and have a look. I don't think it would disrupt things too much. — Zaui (talk) 15:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That helped since most people complain about font or margin sizes. The problem was that I had been tested the wrong parameters, so then the parsing engine (It has to do with the way table are handled) barfed since there were "{}" in it.  —Dispenser 17:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken templates?

message: Why can I no longer force the initial state of a US state navigation template to expanded?  --Buaidh (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me know where you're trying to do this and I'll have a look.  --CapitalR (talk) 09:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: State=expanded

message: Please move the ar. interwiki link inside the noinclude tags. --198.185.18.207 (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed from template - it belongs on doc page, and there's already one there for Arabic. If it's wrong, you can find the one from the template in the source of its old version. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit

message: I'd like to do a major upgrade to this template to fix a few problems with it.  One major issue I have with it is that the title is not centered, due to the image at the top left (see Boston, San Jose, California, and Las Vegas, Nevada for some of the many examples of where this makes it look weird).  I know how to fix this problem and center the title, but of course this makes all of the lists look funny, because they are centered and will not align with the title anymore.  These lists really should be left-align, however, as that makes them much easier to read (graphic design 101: never center text except in headings and titles), links them with their group headings better, and fixes the centering problem.
Here's an example of the New York one, before and after (note that the new version makes use of some new  features (namely, the titlegroup parameter) that will be available after May 1):
Anyone have any thoughts or problems with me making these changes in a few days? --CapitalR (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me. Go for it. — Zaui (talk) 22:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. The centering looks nice. The infinitesimal change in font size helps, too. Funny you mention graphic design 101, Alertbox this week is about (right) alignment. I trust your decision on whether groups as well as lists are left-justified. —SusanLesch (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Support  VerruckteDan (talk) 04:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I just made the change and all the templates seem to still work.  For templates like Hawaii and American Somoa there is now some large whitespace on the right side of the template since left-align is used.  I added the parameter "image" for people who may be unhappy about this...set |image = Image:... to use the parameter.  I recommend setting it to be a map or something, similar to how Template:US county navigation box works.  --CapitalR (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One problem with the current alignment: the capital isn't centered under the state name anymore on my computer.  Is this a display problem with my computer, or is it this way with the template itself?  As long as we're putting the state's name and the capital's name roughly in the middle of the top bar, I think it would be a lot better to have both centered on the same line.  Nyttend (talk) 12:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, someone made a change recently that messed up the centering on IE; I reverted back to the previous version which seems to fix the problem.  --CapitalR (talk) 20:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Centering title and left-align text

message: Is there a way to change the "of" in the "State 'of' XXXXX" section so it reflects the text color that the template specifies rather then black.  See Texas template  
for the text parameter it is | text_color    = #ffffff
Thanks Oldag07 (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: seems fixed now. thanks! Oldag07 (talk) 03:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Of

message: Is there a limit to the amount of groups you can add to a template? Kristinpedia (talk) 23:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Limit of groups?

message: This template creates a box that is unnecessarily hard for the visually impaired to read, because it creates unnecessary wikilinks to state flags that cause screen readers to say things like "Flag of Arizona link State link of Arizona link ...". The flag is purely decorative, and as per WP:ALT #When not to specify it should not have a link so that it does not bother the screen reader (and the user). There's a simple fix, which has already been applied to the sandbox and tested.
Please install this trivial sandbox fix. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 07:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me know if there are any problems. Plastikspork (talk) 07:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Accessibility improvement for visually-impaired readers

message: Since the previous comment, the Mediawiki software has been updated so that it now requires "", instead of just "", for the image to be marked as purely decorative. This template therefore now generates an image that has accessibility problems; I discovered this while checking the Pennsylvania State Capitol article, a featured article candidate. The Mediawiki software no longer supports purely decorative images that have title text (used in tooltips). This means that the  parameter is no longer supported, but that's not much of a loss since it is obvious that the purely decorative image is the flag of the state in question. Please install ; I have  the documentation accordingly. Eubulides (talk) 20:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Update to accessibility improvement

message: I propose standardizing this template's look and feel with that of most other navboxes.  In particular, this would move the large decorative flag from above the groups on the left to a small image in the title (many other navboxes use this style).  In addition, it would make the group font slightly larger, and right-align it (again, standard).  Finally, it would shrink the large title to a normal size and move the capital into the "above" navbox group.
This makes the template look much better when combined with other navboxes.  It always looks funny to me when this one has the large flag image on the left and the large title font, and no other navboxes share this style.  By making the style like other boxes, it will look much better.
Here's an example of what the change would look like:
What do others think of this change? Note that I also proposed something similar here for county navboxes.  --CapitalR (talk) 09:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Support Sounds like a good plan. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm going to be bold and make the change.  If there's a lot of fallout, I can always revert myself.  From past experience, people tend to get pretty protective of their own state's template look, so hopefully this won't be too painful.  --CapitalR (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Standardizing this template's look

message: Can you please remove the flags per WP:ICONDECORATION Gnevin (talk) 01:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This was last discussed in April above and a consensus developed for the current version. Therefore I am declining this request for now and ask that you start a discussion on the matter. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove flags

message: Please change "background:#cddeff;" to "".  The reasoning is that we should be using the default navigation box coloring unless it is specified otherwise.  Thank you. 68.35.24.151 (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Because there have been various edit wars about the colours of templates in the past (this recent discussion comes to my mind), your request may be viewed as controversial, especially if the "#cddeff" is being used deliberately by consensus. I would prefer an indication that this is not the case, before any changes are made. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  As far as I can tell, this would not actually change the color of any of the templates using this meta-template. Looking at all the templates calling this one, all have either a blank value for  or have explicitly specified the value.  None have omitted this parameter completely, so this particular value was/is never being used (and this is even before the IP recently blanked many of them).  The result of using a blank value is to say "background:" which is just bad coding and would be better to omit the value completely. So, I am going to go ahead an boldly make the change.  Please ping me and/or revert if this has an unintended controversial consequence. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  It looks like the IPs edits have been rolled back per WP:BRD, which was a good move given the numerous color edit wars.  I am going to start some threads on the individual templates which have more odd color choices and I invite others to discuss if you are interested. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Color logic

message: Please remove the piped link from 'capital' to List of capitals in the United States. This navbox is about an individual state. There is no reasonable likelihood that this US-wide link would be useful to someone looking at this navbox for an individual state. Colonies Chris (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing unhelpful link 

message: please update to this version of the same box, which (1) removes the extraneous div tags from around the lists, and (2) allows for alternative use of listX, which is compatible with , and we are already allowing for groupX.
note that the double div causes a gap when you try to embed navbox subgroups. and this will fix that problem (see the example above which shows the spacing between group1 and group1a). Frietjes (talk) 00:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Redrose64 (talk) 07:33, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 13 April 2013 

message: Please add a section 9. Needed by the Florida infobox.
RSStockdale (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional section needed 

message: This template passes through the  parameter but not .  Is that deliberate?  It would be helpful to be able to add a footer linking to any book, category, outline, portal etc. relating to the state. Certes (talk) 15:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

text: [ec] I agree that this would be useful. Unless there is evidence of a consensus to leave it out, I suggest you assume that it was not intentional and fix it if you can. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:57, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Better late than never I guess. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:58, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Below 

message: This recent MOS discussion came to the unanimous conclusion that flags and seals do not belong in navboxes, and they specifically cited navboxes that use this template as examples to form this conclusion. The flag code should be removed. This has also been proposed before and rejected on weak arguments. Thrakkx (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nobody has protested in 2 weeks, adding formal edit request. Thrakkx (talk) 00:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 03:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove flags... again