Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Archive 6

message: Someone has changed fontsize=+1 to big+big for countryname in the box, and started implementing this change.
This is a pity. It doesn't look good. On my screen the lower third of "European Union" is hidden behind the drawn box at the Template:European Union table. This may of course be blamed on errors in the browser, but as I use WindowsXP ("professional"), I'm convinced that a lot of readers use older and much older soft ware. Furthermore, the size of the heading for the box is bigger than the size for the title of the page. That's not really good.
/Tuomas 03:32, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  big-big 

message: There's a discussion on standardization of country names in titles (at least for categories) on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion which may be of interest. -- Beland 02:27, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country names in titles 

message: Is anyone interested in a collaboration of the week for different countries, that is, a different country each week? Maurreen 08:56, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: COTW

message: I propose that the ISBN book identifier is added to each country as part of Infobox Country, as a part of it is specific for a country where the monograph was issued. See also: Wikipedia:Book sources and Numerical List of Group Identifiers by Country. --Eleassar777 09:58, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISBN identifier 

message: The template Template:MicrostatesE ("European Microstates") isn't used and thus its usefulness is doubtful. After reading some earlier discussion I guess some people here would like to delete it. It might be an interesting addition to the articles, but there is a similar category already. I'm not aware of any large-scale co-operation between the microstates. If others don't want to apply this template, I'll list it on Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion after a while (that is, if somebody doesn't list it before me). Wipe 16:25, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:MicrostatesE for deletion 

message: Shouldn't the facts tables include info on religions and ethnic groups? These are included in other reference sites, such as Infoplease (which does a spectacular job), and I think they are vitally important pieces of information.
I know the facts table is pretty large how it is. Perhaps a small infobox could be put in the demographics section? Some country articles do this already, but the formatting is inconsistent. See Romania, Estonia, Hungary, etc. - Pioneer-12 01:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox / Demographics 

message: Could we add "Cuisine of X" to the miscellaneous section? And also can we formulate a convention as to whether it is "X-ish cuisine" or "Cuisine of X" (as those on British cuisine seem to think their way is the only right name)? --Dmcdevit 03:08, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuisine 

message: I figure people here might be interested in looking at  that was added to a bunch of country pages. Also Template talk:Mediterranean. --Joy [shallot] 17:18, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  footers - Mediterranean 

message: Any interest in including ISO (three letter codes) and IOC (Olympic Games) country codes?  I have them handy as a side effect of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Flag_Template. (SEWilco 04:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISO and IOC country codes 

message: Even though we have eliminated the international organization footers, the geographic footers are is some cases still a blight. For countries that are in multiple continents and regions I suggest replacing the general templates with a specific ones listing all the countries that share a continent or region. This gives the exact same ease of linking, but is vastly smaller. For instance see Turkey where I replaced , , , , and  with  - SimonP 19:41, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
:having these countries listed uncategorized is unhelpful. for example, people will not immediately understand why we have classified the UK with China and therefore be unable to understand their relation with turkey. we should omit certain templates. for example, if we have Asia, then we dont need Southwest asia. we should also limit the no of templates to 4. --Jiang 07:36, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compressing footers

message: Well.  This project does appear to have stalled.  We added infoboxes to all countries and converted all soverign countries to use the template, but a lot of colonies' articles are still dreadful - look at British Virgin Islands for example.  Lots of sub-articles about Politics of X are still basically copy-and-pastes from the CIA world factbook, which is also appalling, and generally don't get updated.
I've started tagging articles that still have to be reformatted away from CIA style  - which adds them to :Category:CIA World Factbook cleanup - as you can see there are a great deal.  Suggest we concentrate on main pages for countries and Politics of X first.  Morwen - Talk 11:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok - I'll muck in. Secretlondon 17:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

text: I've made a start on Geography of the Falkland Islands and will work on some more in future. Warofdreams 17:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reinvigorating this project

message: An edit war has broken out on Malaysia between a couple of users (see Talk:Malaysia). The bottom line is that one user wants to call Malaysia a "middle-income country" while another wants to call Malaysia a "upper-middle-income country". The difference is that the person who is promoting the upper-middle-income country term is following the World Bank definition (which divides into 4 categories - low-income, low-middle-income, upper-middle-income and high-income) while the other is saying that Malaysia belongs in the middle-income category because it falls roughly halfway in the list of nations by GDP per capita. It's a matter of classification - if four categories are used like the World Bank site, Malaysia definitely belongs in the upper-middle-income category while if countries are classified into three categories of low-income, middle-income and high-income, Malaysia fits in the middle-income group. Can we get some consensus on this and apply it to all countries thereafter? Alex.tan 01:25, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
:I have provided a lengthy outside opinion on Talk:Malaysia. Please do study it, comment on it and fix my mistakes; I know very little of Malaysia. The key of my suggestion is to remove any need for interpretation which is what the dispute centres on. I would suggest that even the classification above interprets the data rather than merely presenting it — which is all an encyclopedia should do. -Splash 02:46, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  classification of countries by GDP per capita 

message: The article on Brunei is nominated to be improved on WP:IDRIVE. You can vote for it there, if you would like to see it improved. The nominations History of the Balkans and Culture of Italy may also be of interest to you. --Fenice 08:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement Drive