Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. counties/county lists

message: I really like these new county list templates, good job folks. 
I do, however, find it unfortunate that when somebody applied this template to List of Counties in Indiana there was no place for the county license plate codes in the template. 
According to U.S._and_Canadian_license_plates#County-coded there are seven states that use county numbering on their license plates. Would you consider creating a template that contains a column for county license plate codes as well? This information is no more esoteric than FIPS codes.
--Bennyfactor 22:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't like some of the changes. Why are the creation, origin, and etymology fields optional? Why are those fields called "data1", "data2" etc and not the more familiar "for", "year" etc? I understand that they still stay as is in the county7 template, but most of us (especially me) are used to it.--Crzycheetah 07:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The creation, origin, and etymology fields are optional because not all county lists use them (For example, List of counties in Hawaii had the creation and origin columns removed as a result of its FL nomination). The reason I abandoned the specific names is to provide an easy way to insert additional information between the normal columns. (For example, the license plate codes in List of counties in Indiana are to the left of the creation year). Tompw (talk) (review) 19:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I forgot that Hawaii nomination. Would you prefer to use the  template instead of the "county7" template in all county lists, even though there were no additional info required?--Crzycheetah 20:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Thanks for the update. List of counties in Alabama is now using the new template to accommodate license plate numbers. --Dystopos 20:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That was caused by bad coding on my part... fixed now. Tompw (talk) (review) 20:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: * I question the usefulness of this column for a list such as this. That seems like the sort of information that often resists very short treatments and is better placed in the article on the county itself. Also I'm not sure that 'etymology' is even the correct term for the derivation of proper names. --Dystopos 20:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree twice. Etymology should not generally be attempted here and the term is misleading. Many name sources are appropriate. "Source of name" is shorter and sufficient; of course that's the county name. Is there a general technical term, such as eponym when the source is a personal name? Maybe "Eponym" is ok even if it is a loose fit? --P64 (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: Near the end of the list all the templates are just links. Could someone take a look at the page and help me figure out what's wrong with it? Psychless 20:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with [[List of counties in Iowa]] 

message: We near the point where very county list page has a basic level of information (seats, year of creation, populations and areas) with a reasonably consistent layout ( and ). Big thanks to everyone who's helped get things this far, especially Crzycheetah. I would like to suggest the following to help bring all lists up to FL standard:
* Contact state wikiprojects to request they add information, especially into the lead. They have specific knowledge (especially for sources/references) which will prove useful
* Ensure layout is standardised, by applying  where not present, and converting the few lists that still use  to 
* Ensure lists follow MoS guidelines with regard to things like section orders etc.
Any thoughts/commetns/additions? Tompw (talk) (review) 20:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outstanding tasks 

message: I saw Forcesdumal13 changed change the map used in List of counties in New Jersey (an FL) to a labeled map. When I undid the edit (providing a reason in my edit summary), he changed it back, saying "this is the same type of map used for almost ALL of the western states (see: CA, TX, MI, MT, OK, OR". I figured this would be the best place to discuss which map is better, as it probably affects other county maps. My reasons for reversion were
#More aesthetically pleasing (FL criteria 5a)
#Article-specific ALT text can be added that says "see the list for details" (which was suggested by ALT text guru Eubulides at the FLC)
#The labeled map's only benefit are the links, which can by seen in the table. Mm40 (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the labeled template map is more aesthetically pleasing.  It also matches the colors advocated on the Maps wikiproject.  The labeled map can still have alt text, it just needs to be added on the template page.  The links are a nice addition.  Kmusser (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Labeled Map 

message: At List of counties in Virginia the "Date" for independent cities needs attention. See Talk:List of counties in Virginia.
"Origin" is empty for most Virginia counties. For its Inde Cities, the point is origin of their IC status, commonly long after they were established as cities in the ordinary sense. In those cases it will be routine to enter some Origins along with the Dates when those are researched. 
We have three other independent cities as county equivalents in the United States, one each in Maryland, Missouri, and Nevada, whose county lists are all Featured Lists (while Virginia is far short of that). Here are their Name, Date, and Origin fields for the independent cities.
*Baltimore City, 1851, "Founded in 1729. Detached in 1851 from Baltimore County"
*St. Louis City, 1876, "Created in 1876 when city residents voted to secede from St. Louis County"
*Carson City, 1969, "Separated from Ormsby County"
The latter is not very good, and so much would be easy to do quickly for all of the Virginia IC. The first two provide models for Virginie aspiration. 
... The Baltimore model is easier to research ;-) so I have revised the latter thus.
*Carson City, 1969, "Founded 1858, consolidated with rump Ormsby county in 1969." 
All of the Nevada entries end with a period(.) so that fits the local style. --P64 (talk) 17:55, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent Cities