Template talk:Minnesota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject Minnesota This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
Template This article has been rated as Template-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of High-importance within Minnesota articles.

Contents

[edit] Criterial for major/minor cities

What are the criteria (i.e. population figures) for calling a city a 'major city' or a 'smaller city?' Not just MN, though. Is there a standard figure that's used on wiki? If anyone can tell me I'd appreciate it because I'd like to add some info, but I don't know exactly where to put it--Hraefen 07:17, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Since no one has responded to my question above, I have made an executive decision to remove from the "smaller cities" section all cities with populations under 10,000. I removed International Falls, Montevideo, Pipestone and Wabasha. I think 10,000 is setting the bar pretty low. If you disagree with this decision, pleas discuss here rather thn reverting.--Hraefen Talk 23:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Several cities listed in smaller cities have populations exceeding that of St. Cloud. What population cutoff should we use for large cities? Appraiser 04:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it should be "Metro Areas", instead of "Major cities". If it was just straight by population then it would pretty much be a list of suburbs. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 06:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually you are wrong on the st.cloud stat, and so is the article. Half is in one county and half is in another, so it is often split into two seperate entries. Its actually the 3rd largest area with 115k people. This place seems to be the problem, I think: [1] Maybe we can find a source without the (part) style. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 06:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
After some on-line research, here's what I've concluded: The St. Cloud Metropolitan Statistical Area has a total population of about 181,000 [2]. The population within the city limits (which includes portions in Sherburne County, Stearns County, and Benton County) is about 64,308 [3] and breaking it down, 6726 in Benton, 6629 in Sherburne, and 50,877 in Stearns = 64,232 [4]. So, I propose we change the heading from Major Cities to Major Cities and Metropolitan Areas, since St. Cloud has some significance that sets it apart from places like Plymouth (70,455) or Brooklyn Park (71,048). Appraiser 14:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I see I added the stearns and total together.. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 22:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Should Townships be added to smaller cities over 10,000? It seems to me that unincorporated townships shouldn't be listed no matter how large they are. They aren't cities.--Appraiser 00:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attractions

Should there be an attractions section? Maybe a spot for large parks and stuff like the mall of america. -Ravedave 23:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I think that's worth considering. Including that may push the template towards become more cluttered, but it seems like a noteworthy topic. We might have to come up with some kind of criteria for what attractions to include, though.--Daveswagon 04:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. state templates

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates lists and displays all 50 U.S. state (and additional other) templates. It potentially can be used for ideas and standardization. //MrD9 07:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replace "Rivers" with "Lakes"?

Does anyone think it would be a good idea to replace the "Rivers" link in the template with one for "Lakes"? The state is noteable for its lakes, not its rivers. I suppose we could have both, but I'd rather keep the template clean.--Daveswagon 04:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Standardization of state templates

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding standardization of state templates (primarily regarding layout and styling) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates. An effort was made earlier this year to standardize Canadian province templates (which mostly succeeded). Lovelac7 and I have already begun standardizing all state templates. If you have any concerns, they should be directed toward the discussion page for state template standardization. Thanks! — Webdinger BLAH | SZ 22:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] St. vs. Saint

This is minor, but I think consistency is desirable for an encyclopedia. Saint is spelled out for 2 names, but not for the other 6 names with Saint in them. The articles for all the places, except Saint Paul, abbreviate the name as St. in the actual title. Here is how they're currently spelled in the template:

  • Saint Paul
  • Saint Cloud
  • North St. Paul
  • St. Louis Park
  • St. Peter
  • South St. Paul
  • West St. Paul
  • St. Louis county

I propose we just abbreviate to St. in all the names. Nathanm mn 18:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] navigation

Someone recently added the "view", "discuss", and "edit" navigation capability. I think that will severely increase the amount of vandalism and undesirable editing the template receives, since it will be much easier for novices to find it. I propose reverting that addition. Anyone agree or disagree?--Appraiser 12:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I reverted the edit because it broke the link to Saint Paul (capital). I would like to see Template US state navigation box have a hide option. What do you think?-Susanlesch 16:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I use good-sized monitors, so probably would never hide it myself, but if other people have a reason to do so, that would be fine. I see that the Template:US state navigation box now has a Tnavbar-header in it, so I suppose I need to take my objection there. I still think we're likely to get many more undesirable edits to the template with the Tnavbar-header on it.--Appraiser 19:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • At the discussion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates#Straw Polls, it was agreed not to use the Show/Hide form for these boxes, but you're welcome to continue that discussion on that talk page. --CapitalR 23:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm not too worried about people using the view/discuss/edit tag for vandalism at this point. I say we see how it goes for now instead of pre-emptively removing those options. --CapitalR 23:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/i/n/Template_talk%7EMinnesota_79b6.html"