Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Current Local City Time
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Template
I've made a template to do this, {{currenttime}} where you can put {{currenttime|place=Ottawa|offset=-5|dst=Europe}} to get this:
- The current date and time in Ottawa is Monday 9 June, 01:45.[1]
I've also fixed it to update the date correctly depending on the timezone. Unfortunately, <ref> tags don't work through templates so I've taken them out. Tra (Talk) 02:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm just learning a lot about this programming. I spent the last several hours on making this time stamp: Monday 9 June, 01:45 (EDT). Thank you for your work. I'll read into it after my rest! Goodnight. --CyclePat 06:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Review of Programs
Well there is definatelly some good work that we have done here. Thank you Tra! For those of you interested in learning about date and time this is how I started. I used these basic codes:
Example 1
- {{currentdayname}}, {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}, {{CURRENTTIME}}
The problem was that it wasn't the correct time for my region. So, I then moved on to fidling around with parser codes such as {{#time: l j F, h:i}}. I got to the point where I ended up using large parser functions. Example 2 shows these function being used with calculations and sub-templates such as template:Current daylight saving offset in North America. Example 2 also shows the yesterdays date and time in Ottawa either 24 hours ago EST or 29 hours ago according to UTC.
Example 2
- {{#ifexpr: {{#expr:({{#time: G }} - 29) >= 0}} | {{#time: l}} | {{User:Ed Poor/yesterday}} }} {{#ifexpr: {{#expr:({{#time: G }} - 29) >= 0}} | {{#time: j }} | {{#expr:{{#time: j }} - 1 }} }} {{#time: F","}} {{utc|{{#expr:-29 + {{Current daylight saving offset in North America}}}}}} ([[EDT]])
Example 3 - Output of code from Example 2
- Sunday 8 June, 01:45 (EDT)
You may notice that the above time is calculated through several other templates we use from User:Ed Poor/yesterday and template:Current daylight saving offset in North America. You will also notice that this programming is not as efficient as the {{currenttime}} because it is missing a easy way to imput the time zone delay. Furthermore, though our planet only has an offset zone of 12+ or 12-, this equation is limited to going back only one day (23 hours)! (ex.: Day --> Sunday to Saturday, Date --> 15 to 14, ONLY). This formula or possible future template will work but needs improvements. It can obviously be use by manually imputing the offset time in each section, however, this template, code example 2, by me CyclePat should be improved before we decide to use it within the CCT project. But why improve it when we have the fine work by Tra.
The template by Tra is ideal to move on to the next steps. Here is an example of the template:currenttime offset for Ottawa:
Example 4 - Output of Tra's Currenttime template
- The current date and time in Ottawa is Monday 9 June, 01:45.[2]
Further testing of the time with an offset of -59 hours and a location called "Nowhere on earth" gives good results:
Example 5 - Output Test -59 hours, place=Nowhere on earth
- The current date and time in Nowhere on earth is Friday 6 June, 19:45.[3]
.
Wow! Nice! Now if only I knew what Tra meant by <ref> tags? Thank you Tra. --CyclePat 20:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- By <ref> tags, I mean that the example you used in the Ottawa article contained a footnote at the bottom of the page with a link to purge the article. The problem is that footnotes don't work properly through templates so I had to take them out. The main problem now is that there needs to be some way of purging the page with the time on it regularly, because if it is left for more than a few minutes, the time generated would become useless. Tra (Talk) 21:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template reference and purging
Okay, I figured out the reference tag problem by looking at your first programming. I noticed that we attempted to add the <references/> at the bottom of the article. I don't think that would work either. I was thinking though that perhaps, we could just place the ref tag and since most articles arleady have a references sections we leave it at that (or place a hidden text : <!-- If there is no <references/> sections in this article please add one!-->
But you bring on another valid point. Does the page need to be constantly purged? I noticed for example the time says 14:32 (for this discussion page). I tried to refresh my browser with ctrl-f5, but it still is the same. Is the time going to be correct for anyone that accesses the page for the first time? What I mean is will it stay like that for only people that have accessed the page? clearly this would require a warning in the reference for purging the page. Generally when someone comes to an article it is "the first time" that they acces the page, no? And again, does this matter?
Asside, I'm debating if we should have something that says: to find out the time in Ottawa click here. (and reference to the time in the bottom or another sub-page)(ie.:click here to find out the time in Ottawa subpage--> Ottawa/currenttime?) or being part of a category?
Is the issue of purging, concidering we have a warning in the reference that would be significant that important? If someone really wants to know they just need to click the reference.
Anyway for the reference perhaps we should have a reference to the source UTC: ex.: UTC 10 or whatever the user imputs. The way we have a reference, links going, to that page. and maybe this project... I'll think of something. --CyclePat 21:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CyclePat (talk • contribs) 21:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC).
- The problem isn't the presence, or absence of a <references/> tag, but a bug in the MediaWiki software where the code that generates footnotes from wikicode to HTML doesn't handle templates properly.
- As for purging the page, what might work would be to have one page which lists the current time for each of the locations around the world, then link to that page from each of the location articles, perhaps through a link in an infobox used in them. This link would not be a normal link, but would contain &action=purge so that whenever a user clicks the link, the page is purged, the times are updated and the page is shown to the user. Tra (Talk) 22:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Should we place every possible number as per {{timezones}} adding the time beside it like +6:30={{currenttime}}. -12 | -11 | -10 | -9:30 | -9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | -4 | -3:30 | -3 | -2:30 | -2 | -1 | -0:25 | UTC (0) | +0:20 | +0:30 | +1 | +2 | +3 | +3:30 | +4 | +4:30 | +4:51 | +5 | +5:30 | +5:40 | +5:45 | +6 | +6:30 | +7 | +7:20 | +7:30 | +8 | +8:30 | +8:45 | +9 | +9:30 | +10 | +10:30 | +11 | +11:30 | +12 | +12:45 | +13 | +13:45 | +14 (and then place the equation beside each one?) --CyclePat 03:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Note:-3:30 if daylight savings time is on becomes -2:30... and i'm checking for other if exceptions. --CyclePat 03:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Should we place every possible number as per {{timezones}} adding the time beside it like +6:30={{currenttime}}. -12 | -11 | -10 | -9:30 | -9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | -4 | -3:30 | -3 | -2:30 | -2 | -1 | -0:25 | UTC (0) | +0:20 | +0:30 | +1 | +2 | +3 | +3:30 | +4 | +4:30 | +4:51 | +5 | +5:30 | +5:40 | +5:45 | +6 | +6:30 | +7 | +7:20 | +7:30 | +8 | +8:30 | +8:45 | +9 | +9:30 | +10 | +10:30 | +11 | +11:30 | +12 | +12:45 | +13 | +13:45 | +14 (and then place the equation beside each one?) --CyclePat 03:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I tested the subst:currenttime on conneticut. There is obviously a little problem with the purge and we shouldn't leave a wrong date and time. So I think we will need to have a link somewhere. How? what? We'll have to think about that. But using the already existing timezone in some of these tables will need to be option that we should provide as a solution. Sounds like an interesting thing. --CyclePat 04:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Test references with substitute
References
- The current date and time in Ottawa is Monday 9 June, 01:45.[4]
- ^ Calculated using Wikimedia Foundation Inc. and UTC+0. For more information see WP:CCT. To update time purge page cache.
- ^ Calculated using Wikimedia Foundation Inc. and UTC+0. For more information see WP:CCT. To update time purge page cache.
- ^ Calculated using Wikimedia Foundation Inc. and UTC+0. For more information see WP:CCT. To update time purge page cache.
- ^ Calculated using Wikimedia Foundation Inc. and UTC-5. For more information see WP:CCT. To update time purge page cache.
[edit] Placement
This is a good feature, but I disagree with its placement at the top of pages like Connecticut [1]. It's just weird to have the article open with a statement about the time in Connecticut, before the first paragraph has even had the chance to tell you what Connecticut is. Perhaps it would be better suited for the infobox? — brighterorange (talk) 06:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think it is appropriate to include the local time at all. It is unencyclopedic and it is also redundant to the time zone information that is currently standard in most geographic location articles. Further, for geographic locations (like countries) that span multiple time zones, what would you put? At best, this type of thing would be suitable for city-project's portals, but not for the articles themselves. --RealGrouchy 06:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
| Ville de Montréal (City of Montréal) | |||
 |
|||
|
|||
| Motto: Concordia Salus | |||
  |
|||
| Coordinates: | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Canada | ||
| Province | Québec | ||
| Founded | 1642 | ||
| Established | 1832 | ||
| Government | |||
| - Mayor | Gérald Tremblay | ||
| Area | |||
| - City | 366.02** km² (141.3 sq mi) | ||
| - Metro | 4,047 km² (1,563 sq mi) | ||
| Population (2001) | |||
| - City | 1,583,590** | ||
| - Density | 4,326.5/km² (11,205.6/sq mi) | ||
| - Urban | 3,015,665UNIQ4b47bae0db88e0a-ref-00,002,127-QINU | ||
| - Metro | 3,707,842 UNIQ4b47bae0db88e0a-ref-00,002,124-QINU | ||
| Metro population est. 2005 | |||
| Time zone | Eastern (EST) (UTC-5) | ||
| - Summer (DST) | EDT (UTC-4) | ||
| Postal code span | H | ||
| Area code(s) | (514) and (438) | ||
| **Area and city population figures reflect the new 2006 demerged city territory | |||
| Website: Ville de Montréal | |||
-
- I have added an example of a template... (no changes)... taken from Montreal. I have pondered the idea for a while now and I agree that the information is somewhat redundant to a time zone information which can be found on most geographical zones (cities, states, even some countries). This project is hence going out of the way if we work on a state, province, country. However... Some countries only have one time zone! (Perhaps we should leave that up to another project called... damm that won't work country starts with a "C" hence we would have the CCT project.) You are right... let's take this one step at a time and concentrate on cities. Anyways, we have not really discussed placing this information in this side bar template. At least there appears to be a concencus that we should build several types of templates. I think we should talk about them first.
- Template within the existing city templates: Do we want to just place the time with it's own little category directly in the template?
- 1 - The first set of questions deals with the formating of date and time if we place it in the article:
- i - Do we want to remove the current time zone reference (ex.: UTC-5), put the time in it's place (ex.: It is currently 18 January 2007, 18:00 in Ottawa) and have it redirect to the time zone?
- ii - Do we want to do the oposite by keeping the time zone information (ex.: UTC-5), have that linked of course to it's own article (as it is right now) and place the time in that article?
- 2 - This set of questions deals with how we should format the time if we place it in an external link to the article.
- i - If we place the time in the UTC articles, should it just be there... (will the problem of purging still exist?)
- ii - Is it better to make a template that is seperate from not only the location (geographical) but the UTC times articles, which in turn could then have a link to this information? These are mostly open questions to help us think about what direction we should take. Feel free to leave your comment, and thank you for your feedback. p.s.: What I would like to know is how they get the coordinates at the top right corner? --CyclePat 23:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have added an example of a template... (no changes)... taken from Montreal. I have pondered the idea for a while now and I agree that the information is somewhat redundant to a time zone information which can be found on most geographical zones (cities, states, even some countries). This project is hence going out of the way if we work on a state, province, country. However... Some countries only have one time zone! (Perhaps we should leave that up to another project called... damm that won't work country starts with a "C" hence we would have the CCT project.) You are right... let's take this one step at a time and concentrate on cities. Anyways, we have not really discussed placing this information in this side bar template. At least there appears to be a concencus that we should build several types of templates. I think we should talk about them first.
-
-
-
- The coordinates in the top right corner are added using some css positioning through the {{coor title dm}} template. As for putting in times, what I think might work is to give each infobox a link to a single page, say Wikipedia:WikiProject Current Local City Time/Times (or some other page name) and on this page put in the code to give the local time for several locations. To solve the problem of purging, we could make sure that each of the links in the infoboxes are links to purge Wikipedia:WikiProject Current Local City Time/Times so that every time a user clicks to view the current time, they automatically purge the page as they view it, so the time will appear correct for them.
- As for the positioning of the link, it could probably say something like 'view current time' next to where the timezone is mentioned. Tra (Talk) 00:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Agreement
Hello Tra, I guess it's about time I get back to here! (pun intended). I think I'll start working on your suggestion. It seems like one of the best ways and least intrusive.... hummm... If worse comes to worse we just don't use it. So as they say, "we talk the talk".... I think I'll start up the walk. --CyclePat 01:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Categories...
[edit] Category:UTC
As per WP:CCT, I am currently creating an automization process to place cities in their respective time zone category. Currently they are placed in the categories
- -12
- -11
- -10
- -9:30
- -9
- -8
- -7
- -6
- -5
- -4
- -3:30
- Category:UTC-3.5
- -3
- -2:30
- -2
- -1
- -0:25
- UTC (0)
- +0:20
- +0:30
- +1
- +2
- +3
- +3:30
- +4
- +4:30
- +4:51
- +5
- +5:30
- +5:40
- +5:45
- +6
- +6:30
- +7
- +7:20
- +7:30
- +8
- +8:30
- +8:45
- +9
- +9:30
- +10
- +10:30
- +11
- +11:30
- +12
- +12:45
- +13
- +13:45
- +14
- Category:UTC-Please add timezone
Because there are states, towns, provinces, countries, etc, and since I am utilizing the template:infobox city to generate the thousands of cities that are listed (ie.: Category:UTC-5) I wanted to use those (ie.: UTC-5) categories as the main ones and then use the other ones (ie.: Cities in UTC-5, provinces in UTC-5, countries in UTC-5) as the subcategory. Any comments would be greatly appreciated... Thank you! --CyclePat 23:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- You cannot categorize cities using parameters from the infobox, as it gives the wrong results for a number of cities. For example: Sao Paulo is categorized in Category:UTC-3, but it actually is in Category:UTC-2. Eugène van der Pijll 11:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- That is really a problem to take up with CCT but rather with WP:OR, WP:CITE, WP:V, and all the rest of the rules that pertain to wikipedia. Nevertheless, now that I think about, it may be important to start linking to UTC-2 and UTC-3 articles that exist (note the diference is they are articles and not categories). Anyways, we can only fascilate the gathering of information and canot garantie the accuracy for it is up to every person who created the template to have properly sourced their information. If you wish to work on fixing these discrepencies, you are more than welcomed to be WP:BOLD and change the wrong UTC for that article and any other article you may spot which you a sure is wrong. That's what the categories are there for... they help us find the anomolies. Obviously, you found one that wasn't properly categorized. Keep in mind though that you may wish to verify that your information is correct. I know for a fact some regions move their UTC back 1 hour during DST, but some other regions do not. Good luck. It's a bigger project than you may think --CyclePat 06:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- No, it's certainly a problem with the template, not with the Sao Paulo article itself. Sao Paulo currently observes DST, and your template does not take that into account. Until you have a working implementation of DST rules for every country, the automatic calculation of the time zone will be wrong for some number of cities, and should not be included in the infobox. -- Eugène van der Pijll 09:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- No there is no problem here because there is a simple solution which I will propose. The cities will be categorized in both groups. Meaning Ottawa, for example, will be in UTC-5 and will be automaticaly placed in UTC-4. The DTS will be provided from the template as demonstrated within Lima. Should the DTS not be provided, the article will be classified within a category perhaps called ((please provide DST time)). This working category will give us the ability to verify which cities need to have this information added to the template. The category will indicate just like the article. So we will have categories "UTC-5" and "DTS UTC-5." Or I should say "{{category:Cities in the DTS UTC-5 time zone}} vs. {{category:Cities in the UTC-5 time zone}}. Ensuring that we mention that the categories are distinc and do not reflect the current official time. For the exact DST time shift of a region please refer to ... (the countries DTS policies). Tah dah! --CyclePat 04:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Move and Rename cities
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was this is the wrong venue. Try WP:NAME and its subpages. Significant changes to naming policy should be discussed at the relevant place. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
This section is to discuss the renaming of cities to conform to common denomitor of cities which can be found in the above UTC categories. One example is Category:UTC-5. --CyclePat 02:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC) (p.s.: This issue is being raised at Wikipedia:Requested moves.)
- Support I think this project is worthwhile endeavor that will only benefit the affected articles. An added bonus would be the increase consistency in some of the US & Canadian cities naming convention. Agne 03:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support I obviously support my own nomination per all of above. Thank you! --CyclePat 03:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Proposal violates Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements), change in policy should be addressed at that policy page. You're talking about changing quite a few article names over what's honestly a very minor attribute of the article (the UTC category). -Joshuapaquin 04:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say its very minor. It does show some of the practical failings of using just the Cityname only and how in cases like this, it actually hinders good faith attempts to improve our articles. Contrary to your presentation, it doesn't really violate the naming convention since the majority of city articles do follow a City, State/Province format. There are just a few exceptions which, unfortunately, do cause unnecessary problems with little benefit to offer. Agne 04:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Actually, it does "really" violate the naming convention:
- Places which either have unique names or are unquestionably the most significant place sharing their name, such as Quebec City or Toronto, can have undisambiguated titles.
- I think the more sensible thing to do is approach the designers of the city infobox and request that the infobox allow for the stipulation of an alternate title for UTF categorization. I'm no expert, but it seems like this would be well within their abilities. -Joshuapaquin 05:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, it does "really" violate the naming convention:
-
-
- Again, you are pointing to the exceptions because, as the policy states, "The canonical form for cities in Canada is City, Province/Territory (the "comma convention")." Exceptions are made for various reason and just like the convention itself, are always open to re-evaluation. I am also not an expert on the code functionality so I'm not sure how much effort or trouble would be needed in order to rewrite the code to accept these exceptions. But it does show the lack of practicality in having these exceptions in the first place. Agne 05:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- There's always a solution. It's just finding the best one. We are talking about changing approximatelly 2 to 10 articles which UTC-5 category demonstrates that there are presently more than 1000 articles which all follow the standard format: "<city>, <province>" and that's only in UTC-5. If there is something that is violated withing the Naming conventions (ie.: popular cities, etc.) maybe we could highligh that section because after reading in diagonal I was a bit more confused and it was difficult to see where the concensus started or ended among users on this "naming convention." (Is this even Policy? I though so... it's a guideline) Finally, you know what they say... actions speaks more than words... 1000+ articles spelt with the province name at the end. (So you're saying that there's an convention for 0.2% to 1% of articles?). Anyways... for other solutions. I know that there are only a a handfull of solutions. 1) Make an entirely new template for popular cities... and an entirelly new sub-category as well... 2) Status quo: leave as is 3) Change the title names of the few city articles 4)Somehow engeneer, (I'll need to think at this one for several weeks), a program that can find out what province the city is from, (some countries don't have one as I just learn about Lima) is and add it automatically so when displayed in the category it appears as "city, province." Any, other suggestions? --CyclePat 05:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- p.s.: I didn't say all these solutions are good ! --CyclePat 05:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Again, you're taking two distinct rules for two distinct situations, and falsely characterizing them as "the default" and "the exception". And again: the Canadian editors expect our convention to be in line with the existing convention in place for the entire rest of the world. We are not interested in lining up with the endless debate over the American convention. Furthermore, any amendments to the Canadian naming convention will be decided exclusively by a consensus of the Canadian editors. Bearcat 05:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Hmm.... the decided exclusively by a consensus of the Canadian editors sounds a bit like ownership. I think more fruitful efforts will be in establishing some practical reasons for the 0.2-1% of articles (as CyclePat has estimated) to stay as exceptions and hinder good faith attempts by projects such as this to improve them. Afterall, we are all working for the practical benefits of this encyclopedia and not for our countries. Agne 06:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Another argument against this proposal (I've previously added my opposition farther down the page): it would seem to make it mandatory to display the time in the "city, province" format, whereas that may not be what the article editors want. Cities like Toronto, Vancouver, Montréal etc. are more likely to be known internationally as "Vancouver, Canada" (or just "Vancouver") - the province is of secondary concern. There should be some code in the utility to allow for individual choice as to display. --Ckatzchatspy 06:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- If you exclude the United States momentarily, the overwhelming majority of communities on Wikipedia are in the "City" format. You seem to repeatedly ignore that fact in your determination to force the Canadian convention to conform to a format that's very much the exception around here rather than the rule. And it's also pretty standard practice on Wikipedia that a country's own Wikicontingent gets the final say in determining its own conventions. Bearcat 07:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct in that the US and Canada are somewhat unique in using 2 levels of qualifications. This fact has caused much discussion over 'primary topic' when in comes to deciding if there is a primary use when only one level is used. If there were a common multi level standard, that issue would not exist. What I don't see here is an exact reason why the name of the article affects the ability of this proposal to actually work. Is there a problem like the one I just mentioned with ambiguity? I also have questions about using a time zone category for cities in addition to all of their other categories. This may be over categorization. I agree that if renaming is going to be discussed here, with a resultant guideline change, this discussion needs to be clearly put forth in some other talk pages. Vegaswikian 08:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- If you exclude the United States momentarily, the overwhelming majority of communities on Wikipedia are in the "City" format. You seem to repeatedly ignore that fact in your determination to force the Canadian convention to conform to a format that's very much the exception around here rather than the rule. And it's also pretty standard practice on Wikipedia that a country's own Wikicontingent gets the final say in determining its own conventions. Bearcat 07:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Oppose per Joshuapaquin. New York City, Montreal, Ottawa, Bogota, Philly, Medellin, etc. are unquestionably the primary meaning of those article titles. 70.51.9.156 06:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for contributing your very first edit to Wikipedia to this discussion. I do hope that you plan on staying with the project and editing in many different capacities apart from just this discussion. Feel free to browse the Help Guides to become more familiar with the editing process. Welcome and enjoy editing Wikipedia. Agne 06:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Oppose − How many people, upon reading "Toronto", think of any of the following places:
* UTC-0 − Toronto, County Durham* UTC-5 − Toronto, Indiana which is an "extinct" town* UTC-5 − Toronto, Ohio whose name "was taken from the much larger Toronto, Ontario, Canada"* UTC-6 − Toronto, Illinois which is just some suburban development (as observed using Google Earth)* UTC-6 − Toronto, Iowa which has a population of 134* UTC-6 − Toronto, Kansas which has a population of 312* UTC-6 − Toronto, Missouri according to this site, its coordinates are 38°0'13'' N 92°31'31'' W, which is a bend in a lane through woodland (as observed using Google Earth)* UTC-6 − Toronto, South Dakota which has a population of 202* UTC-7 − Toronto, Texas which according to this site was a rail siding that today can only be identified by "a massive scar in a nearby mountainside" from a former quarry (roughly located at 30°20'32'' N, 103°44'37'' W)* UTC+10 − Toronto, New South Wales which was "named after Toronto, Ontario, Canada in honour of Edward Hanlan"
And how many of the above people, upon clicking the link to simply "Toronto", while still thinking it is one of these places, will be confused as to why the Toronto they had expected does not show up, but has instead been usurped by this "Toronto, Ontario"?
This same argument is equally applicable to most of the places CyclePat has listed here− Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- How about this:
- Rename all of the articles in question to City, Province/State as suggested
- Make the city which is the most commonly used & known the article to which the redirect points. (e.g. Toronto redirects to Toronto, Ontario)
- Does this cause any problems? For example, after implementing this change, if I do a wikipedia search for Toronto, will it take me directly to Toronto, Ontario (which would be preferable) or will it lead me to an ugly search result page?
- − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- How about this:
-
-
- Umm....so the people who are looking for the Canadian city in Ontario are going to be "surprised" to find an article about.... the Canadian city in Ontario? Eh? The logic works in either direction I suppose. If I'm looking for any of the other Torontos, it not much more of a hassle to find it. Neither would more hassle happen to find the Canadian one. Agne 06:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- But I didn't mention Toronto, Ontario in my list, did I? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Oppose - page location is a matter to be discussed at the individual articles, not here. Furthermore, it doesn't make sense to move articles to fit a time reference utility or a category - it should be the other way if anything. (The move request should also spell out the rationale for wanting this move in greater detail, please.) Lastly, there have been discussions about moving more unique Canadian pages to non-disambiguated titles. Going beyond that, what happens if the code/category goes world-wide? Will every city article have to "fall into line"? --Ckatzchatspy 06:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose for the billionth time, for reasons stated ad nauseum. Cleduc 09:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- 'Oppose per other comments. Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. Outside of Canada, how many people know that Toronto and Ottawa are in Ontario? My guess would be not many. Ground Zero | t 12:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Adamantly opposed, as well as extreme oppose to proposing this in such an obscure corner of the Wikipedia. BlankVerse 12:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - first of all, how about an explanation of what it is you intend to do? All I can tell is that there are going to be a lot of seemingly unnecessary city article renames. --Yath 16:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. These names have generally been decided through extensive discussion on the article talk pages or on WikiProject pages. - SimonP 17:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. All Wikipedia articles should be at the most commonly used name to refer to the subject of that article if there are no conflicts. Category-specific naming conventions should not be about how to name all articles within a given category; they should be about how to name only those articles within the relevant category whose most commonly used name is unavailable because it has ambiguation issues with other articles. --Serge 18:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose and endorse Bearcat's position. The reason behind the logic that we as Canadians/Canadiens will decide where our pages will be stems from the US editors blindly following policy and refusing to rename any of their's because of consistency/religious policy followers/ect. The proper thing to do is worry about your own countries articles, and let us put our pages outside the so-called comma convention. We polled about this and decided that there was no policy/guideline that we could create to encompass everything. Our solution was to evaluate cities on a case by case basis, not lumping them all together. We have decided that we will be liberal about names (very Canadian like). Like in Real Life, we won't be controlled by a US centered policy. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 18:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comments
- Montreal is not located in Ontario, so Montreal, Ontario is incorrect. Montreal is located in Quebec, which is why the redirect Montreal, Quebec works. 70.51.9.156 06:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- New York, New York - New York County, or New York City? New York City, New York County or New York County, New York State? or New York, New York, New York?
70.51.9.156 06:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well it seems like this topic went a little off topic. We are talking about the generated list of more than 1000+ cities in a category and how approx. 2% do not conform to the standard. The sub-issue... or solution is to change the name. Oh shoot I forgot to put an RfC. Uh! doesn't really matter. After a good rest, I think I have some other ideas. Anyway the main issue this was brought here is because of the formating and subcategorization of these cities. ie.: Canadian cities, US cities, Cities without a province, cities with a province but without the province name in the title according to wikipedia standards on popularity, (you can see how rediculous that category would be right!). What the issue fail to really explain is... What is the main reason why a city spelling and naming shoudn't conform to the rest of the commons. I trust most of the users that commented are from that concensus guideline groupe that seem to have been interminably arguing about the format of city naming. Anyway as per the rest of the cities in the UTC-5 list, or other time zones I will be deliberating on what solution I may implement for these categories. (Changing the name of the city is one of the easiest solutions). I had another suggestion of changing the code for the category (this is in done by adding a | after the name of the category). (Ex.: Ottawa, Ontario. Which means, that for every city that only has its name not followed by the province, we would need to utilize a new template and manually add the category properly formated. I have another solution in my mind... but rest asure, I must again state that the common denominator stipulates that cities should have a format of "<city>,<province>." If they do not have this than that means adding adding another sub-category for these "special" cities (which accout for only 0.2%). I would almost consider that to be a type of POV, WP:FORK. This second solution means that any city that does not conform to the majority of the cities within a UTC will be removed via replacing the commonly used template:infobox city with a specific another regional city template. That means we (the ones at CCT project) will need to decide on taking out any city that doesn't conform. So no mater the circumstance, the template for those "special" cities, will need to be changed. And finally the major difference in these solutions is categorization. #1 maintains a category with all the cities in one. #2 differentiates these cities and places all the cities with only the city name in (excuse the term) it's own stupid category. I trust however, again, that the information gathered is indisputable. (2-10 articles for approx. 1000) (and it will only get bigger when we add the other UTC's. I trust this will come back to haunt anyone that supports the idea of not adding a province. Good luck. --CyclePat 16:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Non-conformation with a category-specific naming convention is not a problem if the article name in question is consistent with the more general naming convention: use the name most commonly used name to refer to the subject of the article. Conformity with category-specific naming conventions should only be sought for those articles within the relevant category whose most commonly used names are not available due to conflicts with other uses of that name within Wikipedia. Extending the applicability of category-specific naming convention to those articles within that category that do not require disambiguation is contrary to the spirit and function of Wikipedia. --Serge 18:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Categorization by timezone for cities that observe daylight or summer time
How is the categorization by UTC offset intended to work for cities that observe daylight or summer time? For example Category:UTC-5 includes cities in the US that are currently UTC-5 but are UTC-4 during the summer months. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Good question. It's kind of hard to pointeless to answer though if the category is being nominated for deletion. Nevertheless I will swallow that gulp of hard work and say... A simple equation added to the template to substract the corresponding time when DTS comes in to effect is all that is needed as per the the parser function discussed up above. However, as I mentioned there are other contentious issues, which I would tend to call dream breaker which are afformentioned... (the anoying WP:CfD) on what appears to be based on pure sillyness of a previous vote almost 2 years ago.UTC category Hey! if no body wants this and they don't want a category which I find extremely usuful in identifying wikipedia mistakes and anomolies (as demonstrated above) I guess we might as well stick our heads... maybe we'll be able to find out the real time there? (sarcastically) p.s.: I am piss of at the nomination for RfC of the category:UTC-5. --CyclePat 08:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I think this may require an RfC to avoid conflict in 3RR because this will be my second attempt to try and fix the template. I'm affraid that because of the lack of communication on the talk page that it may be viewed as an edit war... frustratingly I understand some of the key issues but I can't do much after my next edit if the user decided to revert my changes --CyclePat 08:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry this is causing you stress, and maybe this should be taken to Template talk:Infobox City, but as far as I know (and I know pretty far) this can't actually work very well. Categories are maintained in a database table that is updated when articles are saved (not just rendered for display). In addition, rendered articles are cached by a set of front end Squid cache servers and are not re-rendered until they expire out of the cache (I believe it's something like 24 hours) or are modified (which forces an immediate cache expiration). So, on the transition from EDT to EST (or vice versa), even assuming the expression in the template correctly identifies the date and tiime of these transitions, some number of the articles will be in the Squid caches and the displayed version won't be updated until they're next rendered. When they are next rendered the category that's displayed on the article page will be correct, but (and this is the real killer) the category database will not be updated unless the article is saved (requiring at least a Wikipedia:Null edit). I think the net-net is that unless you're thinking about writing a bot to do null edits to all articles affected, each change into or out of DST/summertime will result in only a small number of articles appearing in the correct category (those articles changed since the time switch occurred) with significantly more (and, within a few days, nearly all) displaying as if they're in the correct category but not actually being in the correct category. This all assumes the expression in the template to pick the correct category is perfect, which I think is a very difficult problem in its own right. I strongly suggest pursuing some other approach, not requiring the category to change twice a year. (Note that the caching considerations apply to any mechanism that attempts to display the current time in an article). -- Rick Block (talk) 14:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Eureka! A list is made.
Eureka... I have finally figured it out. User:CyclePat/UTC Timezone/List of places in the UTC-5 timezone will help us finally do some of our work. It's a list of all the places that link to the UTC-5 article. --CyclePat 20:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject user category
It is recommended that Category:Wikipedians in the WikiProject Current Local City Time be renamed to either Category:WikiProject Current Local City Time participants or Category:WikiProject Current Local City Time members according to convention. It is left up to the project participants/members to choose which they would like. Please hold a discussion here and when there is consensus make the change. Thank you. --NThurston 14:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Either of those names seem OK. What needs to be taken account, however, is that the category is currently only used by one member. Tra (Talk) 16:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- I would go for the first one, only because it seems less formal and the people that are here are more like voluntary participants. the word "Member" always makes me think of some "limb." or political connection like "member of parliment." Maybe in the future if the group has more participants then we should change to member. I like the first one. Thank you for the heads up message on my user talk page. --CyclePat 03:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
