Template talk:Infobox nrhp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of listings on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.
Template	This article has been rated as template-Class on the assessment scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Contents 1 State locator map question 2 Maps with inserts 3 Params 4 Coordinates display error 5 Place holder 6 Cities and towns

[edit] State locator map question

There is a consistent set of locator maps for all fifty US states that show county boundaries (or parishes in LA, boroughs in AK). Their color scheme matches that of Image:US_Locator_Blank.svg, and in the interest of full disclosure, I made all but one of them.

I note that the maps I made are used for 45 of the 50 states when specifying the "locmapin =" parameter. They are not currently used for California (which uses Image:California blank map.svg), Connecticut (which uses Image:Connecticut blank.svg), Louisiana (which uses Image:Lousiana-locator.png), New York (which uses Image:New York blank.svg), or Texas (which uses Image:Texas blank map.svg). None of the alternate maps shows counties (or parishes for LA), and the color schemes and inclusion or omission of major rivers in these maps is also inconsistent.

My question is (admitting my COI, so I am fine with whatever is consensus here) should the maps be consistent for all 50 states? If so, which set of maps should be used?

For comparison, here is a gallery of the maps used that do not match the other 45 states and the "consistent" alternate maps. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Current CA map	Alternate CA map	Current CT map	Alternate CT map
Current LA map	Alternate LA map	Current NY map	Alternate NY map
Current TX map	Alternate TX map	Current US Locator map, consistent with 45 state maps

I figure it depends on what you're trying to display. It'd be best, IMO, to have one set with physical characteristics, and one set with political characteristics, from which you could choose depending on what the featured "place" was. For instance, I generally point out bridges. It makes more sense for my purposes to use a physical map, since bridges are generally used to cross physical discontinuities (rivers, valleys, river valleys...). Placing them on a political map doesn't say it as well. - Denimadept (talk) 18:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I do like the faint county lines and consistent colors, but I see Denimadept's point too. Rivers may be more meaningful than county lines in some cases. The comprehensive solution would be to have two sets, either of which could be called, depending on the application. On another note, Rocketmaniac has created a map of GA with a small U.S. map in the corner: User:Rocketmaniac/Sandbox6. I really like the idea and I'm hoping that Ruhrfisch could create something similar for each state to replace the current locator maps. Currently, the "Infobox:protected area" is not using these state maps, but I have suggested their use at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Protected areas#Maps for protected areas, parks, forests and other areas. They may be more inclined to use them if the U.S. map is incorporated as Rocketmania suggests. Thanks--Appraiser (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

If Ruhrfisch was willing, would it be reasonable to combine both types of maps into one, wherein some shade of blue line is used alongside the faint gray lines to denote rivers? I don't see the two types of data seriously conflicting with each other visually, except in situations where the body of water forms a county's border. Even then, regular maps typically just use that water line to denote the border, rather than trying to accommodate both. As for the topic on hand, my preference lies with the maps with county borders, as that does assist visually in more circumstances than with just the rivers. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is how I make these maps from US Census sources: User:Ruhrfisch/Resources#Making_Maps. I made a quick Louisiana map with both parish borders and rivers as taken from the Census at this scale. One problem is that the county borders and rivers are each one pixel wide at this level, and county and state borders take precedence over rivers. So the borders cover the rivers in several cases. The Census also does not show everthing at this level (I had to draw Lake Ponchartrain in by hand originally) so one river is missing compared to the current LA map.

As for Rocketmaniac's map in the infobox, I like it but this only works for states with a blank area to put the US map in. Colorado or Wyoming (rectangles) have no room for an inset without covering some of the state. Even approximately square or rectangular states like Ohio or Pennsylvania or Kansas.

Another possible way to deal with bridges and rivers is to have several maps - see for example Cogan House Covered Bridge which uses the Pennsylvania locator map and a US locator map (both in a Geobox), and a separate watershed map to show the position of the bridge on the creek. I like creeks a lot, so I can sympathize on the rivers maps. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maps with inserts

I've replaced the MN and AL maps with ones including small inserts of a US locator map (examples of usage: Chickasaw Shipyard Village Historic District and Good Templars Hall) and I have similar maps for all the states to migrate to. The rectangular states are slightly different, but with the same utility. Does anyone think this is not an improvement? I don't want to get too far into this without some feedback.--Appraiser (talk) 16:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

First off, I like the idea and the examples shown are good. I would very much like to see an example of a rectangular state (looked at some of the others you've made on Commons, but did not see Colorado or Wyoming etc.).

Second, some suggestions for improvement. I think that the Minnesota map should be redone so that the USA inset does not cover any of the state of MN. I also think the MN map should have a black border all the way around (it currently lacks a black border at the edge of the map at the US inset). I also think the USA inset map should have a black border all the way around it and that the borders of the inset and state maps should overlap on one edge (if on a side) or two edges (if on a corner). The US inset in the Alabama map does not have a black border all the way around and others I looked at were even more disconcerting without a border (see especially Image:Maryland Locator Map with US.PNG, where Canada on the inset blends in with Virginia and West Virginia on the Maryland map - a border would set the US inset map off more clearly).

Third, please provide credit where credit is due - the US Census maps cited do not include any Canadian information so I drew in the Lake of the Woods on the Minnesota map by hand, or the borders of Siberia and Canada in the Alaska map or (because the Census lake borders are awful) Lake Ponchartrain in the Louisiana map (and several other lakes). If, as I strongly suspect, the state maps are the ones User:VerruckteDan and I made, then we should also get some credit along with the Census and yourself, and the person(s) who made the US state locator inset maps should also be credited (indeed the GFDL requires this). Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for failing to give you credit for your work on these. Indeed, I did modify yours and didn't realize that you had drawn in any features. I will absolutely correct my omission. Please accept my apology.

I agree that a border around the inset would be an improvement and that the MN inset is slightly too large, overlapping a few acres of the state. I'm not clear about what you were saying about the border around the states. If the new border around the inset just touches the existing border around the state, does that take care of that issue?

For the rectangular states, I had to add map space below the state map. It will require tricking the geo software by setting the southern edge to a fictitious latitude that would be equivalent if the map continued to the south using the same scale as the state map. Since it will take some work to get those running properly, I thought I'd do the others first.

Special thanks to User:VerruckteDan, User:Ruhrfisch, User:Huebi, and User:Rocketmaniac, who have done lots of work and have come up with these ideas before I arrived. I in no way wish to overshadow their work.--Appraiser (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. I almost didn't say anything about credit as I didn't want to make you feel bad. Please accept my apology and don't worry about it - it is just easier if the maps are credited so that if there is a problem and others fix it, they know where to go to get the source maps (the Other versions = parameter in the Commons information).

As for the border question, I did not express myself very well or clearly. What I meant was that I think it looks neater if the boxes share a common 1 pixel wide black border where they touch. As a somewhat different example of what I mean, look at the border on the white box in the lower left corner of this map - see how there is just one border in the corner for both the map and the box (they share the border)? That is what I meant - I can make a map that does this as an example if you would rather. Thanks for all of your work on this, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Params

What is the difference between the "designated", "added", and "established" parameters? The documentation only discusses added. Collectonian (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinates display error

I'm noticing that the coordinates display incorrectly on both Firefox and Internet Explorer. They are duplicated and overlapping themselves. I uploaded a link so you can see what I mean, http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb293/timkloske/Coords.gif. I'm using Windows XP, 32-bit. Tkgd2007 (talk) 14:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I expect that happens if there are coords coming from two different places, such as the nrhp infobox and the bridge infobox or one of the other sources. The fix is to not provide it more than once. - Denimadept (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

On that page, it's being provided by both the nrhp infobox and a Geolink template. Pick one. - Denimadept (talk) 14:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC).

I think the template was recently edited to show the coordinates in the top right corner as well as the infobox. That causes a problem at Haymarket affair, where the top corner shows the coordinates of the site of the Haymarket riot and the infobox shows the site of the Historic Landmark (the cemetery where those who were wrongly convicted were buried). Is it possible to restore the older version of the template, so the coordinates show only in the infobox? If somebody wants the coordinates to display in the top right corner, they can use one of the "coor title" templates. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

As an alternative, maybe the coordinate display in the top right corner could be made optional, so editors can "turn it off" when appropriate. I don't understand template coding well enough to make these sorts of changes myself. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, we don't need the NRHP infobox to display title coord. We have plenty of other sources already doing this, so all this does is make a mess. - Denimadept (talk) 12:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

At Template talk:Coord#Display problem I point out that a style used in this infobox is causing the coordinate to be misplaced. I don't know what the most general solution would be. -- SEWilco (talk) 18:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Place holder

Would anyone object to adding Image:HistoricPlacesNationalRegisterPlaque.JPG as an image placeholder if no image is listed within the infobox? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

If nrhp2 template is used a map will appear as well as the image. If nrhp template is used, adding the placeholder will prevent a map from coming up. I'm in favor of maximizing information and I don't think the plaque adds anything. I'd rather people spend their time acquiring actual photographs. I spent a couple of hours last weekend searching Flickr for free images and found several useful ones.--Appraiser (talk) 14:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I just saw other pages doing it and thought I'd suggest it. Thanks for your time. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cities and towns

I noticed this template being added to Prince Hall Mystic Cemetery, with an indication that the "nearest city" is Arlington, Massachusetts. In fact, Arlington is a town, and proud of it.

I could add an additional nearest_town parameter to the infobox, but I'm hoping there's a better solution. Ma^t_chups 02:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)