Template talk:Infobox City PT

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Structure

{{Infobox city pt
|image_coat_of_arms = 
|official_name = 
|District = 
|Municipality = 
|area_total = 
|population_total = 
|population_density = 
|Parishes = Nº of Parishes
|coor = XXºXX'N XXºXX'W
|params = XX_XX_N_XX_XX_W_
|website = 
}}

[edit] Example

Agualva-Cacém City coat of arms
District or region	Lisbon
Municipality	Sintra
Area	127 km²
Population
- Total	81845
- Density	7789/km²
No. of parishes	4
Coordinates	38º46'N 9º17'W
Website:

[edit] DO NOT Use Template:Infobox City

The WP:CITY project has created an international city template in order to standardize city infoboxes. It if very flexible, but is there is something that does not meet your needs please post a comment on the template talk page. (or participate in the project by adding you own contribution to the template) Thanks. harpchad 21:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• Why standardize what isn't standard? Only to satisfy your ego? João Correia 20:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • This statement makes no sense, how is replacing a restricted infobox with a more widely used one not standardizing? If you do not want your material to be edited mercilessly, do not submit it. Circeus 01:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
    • If the template created by the WP:CITY includes the "District or region" "municipality" and "number of parishes" fields, we'll probably use it, otherwise, this is much better. Afonso Silva 08:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
      • "district or region" is reproduced with the subdivision_type and subdivision_name variables. Admittedly, though, there are no generic subdivision fields (which would actually be a good idea, I posted about it at Template talk:Infobox City) Circeus 12:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• My point is: We made templates for the portuguese cities and municipalities that reflect our specific political organization, and that link directly to pages explaining it. So there is no reason to change them for a standard, more complicated templates, that don't contain this info. And especially do not do a major alteration before O.K.ing it with someone first. Cheers, João Correia 10:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • WP:BOLD. There was nothing inherently wrong with User:Harpchad's action, see also above about merciless editing. Circeus 12:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)