[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Template talk:Infobox settlement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jonesey95 (talk | contribs) at 19:55, 28 September 2023 (→‎Short description templates: a tracking category). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

State Name in Infobox

This was somewhat discussed at Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 32#Use of official name in Infobox Settlement, but a full consensus wasn't ever reached and any work regarding this issue was reverted. Like the|official_name= parameter, whether or not the state name should be included in the |name= parameter is also another point of contention on US articles (e.g. New York City vs. Roanoke) Personally, I believe the state name should be removed on more populated/significant cities but then again, that's my opinion. Though getting some consensus on this issue will likely reduce editor conflicts and give better instruction to new users (like what the |official_name= parameter discussion did). Thank you for your time; have a good day. DiscoA340 (talk) 23:54, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I support having only the name of the settlement in the infobox for |name=, not including any higher administrative district (county, state, province). Adding such district names would disambiguate, and per MOS:INFOBOXGEO: Where the article title is disambiguated, the plain name can head the infobox, as long as the topic is clear (e.g. São Paulo at São Paulo (state)). — hike395 (talk) 02:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I Support coming to a consenus on this. It's not consistent at the moment, and we need to define the policy. My vote is by policy not include state name from the infobox, as this is already covered in the lead and page title. Glman99 (talk) 13:51, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, the current guidance is unclear imo. "This is the usual name in English. If it's not specified, the infobox will use the official_name as a title unless this too is missing, in which case the page name will be used." I read this that the preference is usual name, then official_name, then page name. This is open to interpretation and could use clear guidelines to create consistency. Glman99 (talk) 14:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated below 2 months ago, this is the wrong place to ask this question. If you want consensus for USA articles, then ask it there. Since you have excluded that group from your question, then you still haven't achieved consensus. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 04:46, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This template is used on over a half a MILLION pages (558,000). Since each country has different needs, long ago editors did what made the most sense for each country. In USA, often a community name may exist in numerous states, thus it makes more sense to always include the state too. This has been talked to death over the past 2 decades, yet newer editors come along and act like they know best yet ignore article edit traditions and discussions in the past. If you want to make a blanket policy for the entire world, then numerous editors need to be invited to vote on this subject matter. If this only concerns communities in United States, then this should be discussed and voted on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on usage of native_name parameter for First Nations placenames

1.) Yes; 2.) No — As a sidenote of the underlying guidelines (more an fyi) MOS:INFOBOXGEO is a good place to reference, as it sort of reflects a lot of what's been mentioned here. --slakr\ talk / 05:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


1. Can the "native_name" parameter be used to display an alternative placename that is used by First Nations peoples?

2. If so, should this only apply to places where said First Nations people are the dominant ethnic group? Poketama (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Yes. However, the title of the infobox should be modifiable; as in some places the word ‘native’ is offensive
  2. No. There should be no such restriction. Any inclusion / exclusion should be decided by consensus; with a default to include all. Your proposal would exclude Australian cities, which would be damaging to WP’s reputation to have such a rule Jack4576 (talk) 15:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

  • 1. Yes. 2. No. Poketama (talk) 10:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No but yes sometimes....this is a parameter for first languages ( academically called a "native language") used by a place. That is places where English isn't the de facto language.. like Russian... for places in Russia. Chinese for places in China. It's not an indigenous parameter used for random minority dialects with limited usage. That said if a location or geological feature is widely known by its indigenous name this perimeter could be used. In Canada many many places use a new English term that are derived from indigenous names.....that should be clearly covered in a section of the article devoted to this purpose. As suggested in the 4 previous talks over the past 6 years the parameter needs to be renamed so it's purpose is more clear. What is being proposed here is the ability to add indigenous translations regardless of status or common usage......that has been rejected and reverted for over a decade....for example...Northwest Territories has several Indigenous languages used .... listing all of these without context is confusing, misleading and simply clutter to say the least. We're not here to right great wrongs by giving prominence to one minority language over another just because of the past.Moxy- 20:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1. Yes. 2. No. per my above comments from a few weeks ago. Also to note is that the wording used by Moxy above ("random minority language", "that has been rejected and reverted for over a decade", "confusing, misleading and simply clutter to say the least", "just because of the past") is dismissive, ill-informed, insubstantive, appeals to tradition, and misconstrues the purpose and meaning of the proposed inclusion of Indigenous names. Rowing007 (talk) 01:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Moxy's tone are counterintuitive to the discussion at hand and I hope they refrain from further condescending behavior aka keep the discussion civil. They've been on Wikipedia long enough to know better.  oncamera  (talk page) 05:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1. Yes.: Obviously the infobox could include a placename used by First Nations people. To categorically say otherwise would be ridiculous.
    2. No.: It would likewise be ridiculous to categorically say that First Nations' placenames can only be listed where "First Nations people are the dominant ethnic group". What if they are 49% of the people? A peoples' history can dramatically affect a place even if they do not "dominate" that place. There would have to be significant usage of the placename in the sources; and that would have to be determined on each page. We can't categorically disallow First Nations' placenames for any page unless they are the 'dominant ethnic group'. It would be too sweeping of a restriction. Larataguera (talk) 02:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1. Yes. 2. No. For reasons very clearly laid out by those above. See also my comment below about Template:Infobox First Nation James Hyett (talk) 12:52, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1: yes; 2: no. It is improper speculation to omit what Moxy calls a dying language, and it is censorship to prefer official names that the current government uses over the unofficial names used by those who have been ethnically cleansed. I would not oppose using a different parameter name if existing pages use native_name to mean something different.  — Freoh 13:45, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What we need is a new parameter. It's clear that the meaning is not understood by many. Moxy- 20:31, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have a suggestion for a new parameter and how it might work? Poketama (talk) 10:11, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Indigenous_name = ..... would need to be care full of spam...need officially recognized....for example In 2017, Nunavut approved 625 names in Inuktitut in the Cape Dorset area. In 2016, Manitoba approved 117 Indigenous place names. Cant just spam random translations. Moxy- 14:17, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What are examples of "spam random translations"? Seems very uncommon. If they are reliably sourced, then they should be included.  oncamera  (talk page) 15:48, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Community Names – PWNHC". CPSPG. 2022-07-12. Moxy- 17:31, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Those are "official" names, I asked what are the examples of the "spam random translations" that are supposedly problematic on Wikipedia.  oncamera  (talk page) 14:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Everywhere .....we revert the addition of indigenous translation all over its why we are here.[1] Moxy- 23:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think in most cases, names that are not in widespread use are WP:UNDUE in an infobox. At the same time, the number of fluent speakers of an indigenous language in a locality is not necessarily an accurate measure of how often the name is used. (t · c) buidhe 16:58, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

  • There has been some discussion above about whether this is appropriate. I think that users, including myself, have made good arguments that the native_name parameter is appropriate and would include vital information for Wikipedia users about the names of places used by their First Peoples. These names are important and should not be thrown away because they are not a dominant people, as then most of the colonial world would have their names erased. The usage of multiple names on Wikipedia is not unusual and is seen on the vast majority of pages for places outside of the English-dominant world, as well as pages for Australian, Irish, South African, and New Zealand places. As such, only the US and Canadian Wikipedias do not widely use First Nations names in the infobox although there are instances otherwise (eg. Quebec also uses alternate French placenames, Louisiana uses French placenames, Spanish is used in some parts of the US, and some places like the Navajo Nation use First Nations placenames). Poketama (talk) 10:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Every ethnic group thinks that their translation is the most important. Moxy- 20:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This comment has severe exclusionary and borderline xenophobic undertones. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? (But it is broken). It's not about ranking the importance of different ethnic groups' translations, it's about including the translations of the place names in the language(s) of the native people(s) who live there. Rowing007 (talk) 01:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's also important that a First Nations name is the first name of the place. It's not a translation. It often has deep historical meaning and has broader use to the wider community in a way that, for example, the Chinese transliteration for 'Melbourne' does not.
    Moxy has also made the argument that there are many different First Nations and so there would be too many names to list for a place, this isn't really a real world problem; First Nations territories only overlap at the borders so in the vast majority of cases there is only the need to list one groups' name. If not, is it really such a problem to have more than one? Singapore and many other pages manage just fine. Poketama (talk) 01:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regardless of local racial makeup, I think placenames that have a verifiable indigenous origin (e.g. Seattle or Mukilteo, Washington) or made official (e.g. Utqiagvik, Alaska) should use the parameter. However, using modern translations of names that have not been officially adopted or seen widespread use (e.g. Vancouver) would be inappropriate. SounderBruce 17:25, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree places with names of indigenous origins should clearly cover this fact with sources in the body of the article. But listing a translation term of a dying language spoken and understood by very few people simply to spread awareness of it is not our purpose. Moxy- 20:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yet another misrepresentation of the intent of this proposal, with an ever-present undertone of snark/contempt ("dying language"). Focus on the facts. The parameter name is "native_name". It should therefore include native name(s) for that settlement. Rowing007 (talk) 01:46, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Uh yeah... Many First Nations languages are not dead or dying. The Navajo Nation even has a university. Poketama (talk) 02:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The parameter is related to names of countries in their own languages. In this case "native" does not mean indigenous but is related to de facto language of non English speaking countries. A name change for the parameter to reflect it's original intent that has been used for over a decade an RFC for a new parameter "|Indigenous name =" should be implemented. Moxy- 04:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You keep pointing to the fact that the parameter "has been used for over a decade", but do you know what's been used for much longer? The native names. You're also obfuscating the right to self-determination of Canadian Indigenous peoples (e.g., First Nations, Inuit, and Métis) regarding their governance. Per Aboriginal land title in Canada, Indigenous peoples are conferred the right to decide how the land will be used, enjoyed, occupied, possessed, pro-actively used and managed, and the right to the economic benefits of the land. I would contend that language falls under that definition. Regardless, the parameter is already used for native names of settlements in Northwest Territories and Nunavut, which include languages of First Nations/Inuit in their official languages. In Yukon, where the official languages are English and French, the Yukon First Nations Self-Government Act legislates the "[p]rovision of programs and services for citizens of the first nation in relation to their aboriginal languages". The Yukon Languages Act also enshrines numerous protections of aboriginal languages relating to their use, or of programs or services offered in these languages.
    Here are comparable examples from Australia and Russia:
    • Australian places use Template:Infobox Australian place, and Australia has no official language, yet no locations (that I could find after a moderate search) incorporate Indigenous names in the infobox, even though the "native_name" parameter is used (and conflictingly referred to in the template documentation as both the space for de facto languages and Indigenous languages). For example, the Barngarla name for Port Augusta is Goordnada, but it's not used in the infobox.
    • Russian places use Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality, which boasts comprehensive documentation with separate parameters for additional official languages and non-official languages:
    | loc_name1 = Name in another official language of the federal subject, up to loc_name4 / loc_lang4
    | loc_lang1 = Name of the language in which loc_name1..4 is given
    | other_name = Name in a language that is not official, but important to this inhabited locality
    | other_lang = Name of the language in which other_name is given
    • As well, Template:Infobox islands provides a space for languages of the local population(s). To tie both of these templates togethers with examples, Kola Peninsula lists the Kildin Sámi name (Куэлнэгк нёа̄ррк) in the infobox (in addition to English and Russian). Murmansk lists the Kildin Sámi (Мурман ланнҍ) and Northern Sámi (Murmánska) names in the infobox (in addition to English and Russian), even though the only official language of Murmansk Oblast (in which both Murmansk and the Kola Peninsula are located) is Russian.
    It would seem the obvious solution here is to create a new template for Canadian places/inhabited localities, or at the very least follow the usage set by Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality, with "local" and "other" name parameters. Rowing007 (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Side note: Australian articles do attempt to use Aboriginal placenames. eg. Melbourne This was based on the use of native_name on Infobox_settlement. Poketama (talk) 04:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to point out regarding question 2 (places where First Nation people are the dominant ethnic group) that, at least in the Canadian context, we do have Template:Infobox First Nation, which includes the "endonym" parameter, described as "The preferred or Indigenous-language name of the band, if applicable." This could either be a template used as an example for any new "Canadian places" template that is made, or it could continue to be the primary template used for infoboxes of First Nations. James Hyett (talk) 12:54, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems like, I don't know a lot about it (I'm English), but the First Nations names where there are any are an important part of the history (silly to treat a place that existed before the Europeans arrived as if it had no history before then) and it would be interesting (and only fair) to encourage putting them in, but piffling formalities are important on Wikipedia to keep things from getting jumbled and I do see that that "native_name" is currently used for the name in the majority local language. It looks like, the "Parameter names and descriptions" box currently includes "other_name - For places with a former or more common name like Bombay or Saigon", but this isn't included in the main list and hence isn't obvious unless people scroll a long way down. If "native_name" won't do for First Nations names, what about adding "other_name" to the official list and adding something like "or significant local minority languages such as First Nations names in America" to make it obvious that that's where to put them? Wombat140 (talk) 15:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I shouldn't have to remind everyone that Wikipedia is not censored, even if someone considers a topic offensive. We are suppose to write articles with a neutral point of view as possible, but we don't have to sterilize every topic to a point where there is zero offensiveness. 70.179.149.68 (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Image positioning

I attempted to position the Census population infobox for the West Ishpeming, Michigan article to the left so it would show in the "Demographics" section rather than separated at the bottom right of the article. The result was the infobox was forced to the bottom left of the article and totally as out of place as it was before. It seems the Infobox settlement doesn't allow any image or other to exist tot the left. This seems rather like a flaw in the system and needs to be addressed. Vsmith (talk) 13:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The least bad method that I know of is to align center (which I did) at West Ishpeming, Michigan. This infobox behavior has been around for years: I'm not sure how to fix it. — hike395 (talk) 19:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vsmith: I used the {{stack}} template here to display the population box to the left of the infobox (but to the right of the text). Is that what you were trying to do, Vsmith? Deor (talk) 21:07, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to both of you ... I'll try to remember those tricks, seems I recall using the "align center" bit sometime in the past - but this old brain be forgetful ... Vsmith (talk) 22:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per my edit, it can be done without using stacking. Append {{clear left}} after the photo, and align the census table along the left side. For other articles, "clear left" template is useful in Demographics sections that have a census table and a small amount of text. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 01:09, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 21 July 2023

Can the native_name styling be changed so that the native_name_lang displays before the name? eg. Japanese: 東京都. This would make it more clear what language is being referred to, especially on pages that have lesser known languages. For example, Port Moresby lists 'Pot Mosbi' as a native_name. However, it's not clear what that language is because there's many Papuan languages. (Although I can infer that its probably Tok Pisin, many casual readers wouldn't have that knowledge.). Poketama (talk) 04:12, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can see this being useful. However in a lot of cases (e.g. a Japanese place), wouldn't it would be entirely redundant? Could we think about making it an optional extra perhaps rather than adding it to all articles? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Port Moresby has "Pot Mosbi" in the |other_name= field, not |native_name=. And the language is identified as Tok Pisin in the first sentence of the article, in the parenthesis immediately following the boldfaced name of the place. Deor (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: Idea needs some baking. Izno (talk) 01:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there's something to be explored here. For example, Melbourne lists the Boonwurrung/Woiwurrung name (Narrm) under the English name. When I look at the box, it just says "Melbourne // Narrm // Victoria", and my immediate thought is "what the heck is 'Narrm'"? To contrast with a rather functional example, Murmansk lists the English name and the Russian name (without saying it's Russian), but also lists the Kildin Sami and Northern Sami names while explicitly mentioning those languages; it doesn't just drop those names without context. As we can see with Melbourne, it can be uninformative for readers (and confusing/laborious for curious readers) to see a non-English name without the language being mentioned, espcially when the non-English name does not resemble the English name whatsoever (Melbourne/Narrm = completely different vs. Murmansk/Мурманск = still recognizably similar). This would also contest the claim that it would be redundant to include the language for Japanese place names, because, kanji (or any non-Latin script) is unrecognizable for unilingual English speakers. A middle ground for certain script names where the transliteration is recognizably similar to the English name, could be that the transliteration be used in addition to the script name, and including the language would not be necessary (example: Tokyo; 東京; Tōkyō). Those are my thoughts/solutions. Rowing007 (talk) 19:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest allowing for two flags.

I know of a Canadian municipality that has a modern-looking "municipal" flag and a more traditional "granted" flag. Would be nice if both flags could be shown in the infobox. 184.144.56.164 (talk) 01:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this suggestion. The state of Minnesota in the US is changing their state flag, so the state will for years be populated by two flags. The original is like you describe, a granted seal. I think it could be helpful to display both when the time comes. Pingnova (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Population density: Use land area only?

I think it would be better to use the land area only to automatically calculate population density. What do you think? Kk.urban (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The best way to move this forward is to make such changes at the template sandbox page, see if it works, and then ask to adopt the sandbox version as the new one. See for example the section below. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:51, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 8 August 2023

As brought up here, many pages use this template (via {{Infobox U.S. county}}, but likely also in other ways) providing a percentage sign in the field area_water_percent. While it may be possible to correct all of these pages, it is likely easier to simply account for this in the template. I wrote a quick check for this in the sandbox (diff); I don't know if this is the most elegant way to do this or not, but it appears to work. A testcase can be found at the bottom of Template:Infobox_settlement/testcases3; all other testcases appear unchanged. LittlePuppers (talk) 05:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(The sandbox was synced beforehand, so if this is something that is agreed to be a good idea, it should be fine to just copy the sandbox over if that's easier, rather than find and copy over the exact right part of one line.) LittlePuppers (talk) 05:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 13 September 2023

This template supports both elevation_m and elevation_ft. When either of these parameters is given, the other corresponding elevation measure should be rounded to the nearest whole foot or meter. Likewise with lowest_elevation and highest_elevation. Currently, this template uses the default Template:Convert rounding rules which may use a ten or higher rounding rather than units if the elevation ends in a zero. For example, Denver's official elevation of 5,280 feet is shown as 5,280 ft (1,610 m) rather than the correct 5,280 ft (1,609 m). Please correct these oversights. Thanks,  Buaidh  talk e-mail 05:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If 5280ft is entered, can we safely assume this is correct to the nearest foot? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:43, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Showing 1,610 m as the equivalent of 5,280 ft is fine. If you really want Denver to show 1,609 m, add |elevation_m=1609 to its infobox. I am deactivating this edit request, because there isn't a code change request here that someone can act on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:28, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Short description templates

Hello! I'm an admin from SqWiki and we have imported the same modules and templates that EnWiki has in regard to the settlement infobox. Can someone explain to me why are we getting so many auto-generated templates (link) from this template? I understand the general outline of the mechanism at work with the short description and Wikidata. I don't understand why are we getting templates and what should be the content of those templates generally speaking. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:VAR. The magic word SHORTDESC does not exist on your wiki. There are probably a few ways to work around this difference. One probably stupid idea is to change Stampa:Short description so that it is blank on sq.wiki. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95, oh... Any idea how the other wiki projects have handled this? I mean, we can ask for SHORTDESC to be activated as a magic word at us as well but... Are there any reasons why only EnWiki has that? Is it just that other wikis haven't yet asked for it? Or are there other reasons at play? — Klein Muçi (talk) 16:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Other wikiprojects use the short descriptions that are provided by Wikidata. We at en.WP decided we didn't like that method. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95, ah... What change do we do so that we go the Wikidata way? — Klein Muçi (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No changes. If you go to the search box on sq.WP and type "Ernest Koliqi" (do not press Enter), you will see suggested results. Below the article title for first result, you will see "shkrimtar shqiptar". That short description is automatically pulled from Wikidata (click "All entered languages" near the top of the page to see the descriptions in many languages). – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95, I see. What about depopulating the wanted templates list? Is there any change you can suggest that gives a good solution to that? Apart from blanking that template (which looks like a crude hack - maybe it's not?) — Klein Muçi (talk) 19:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you wanted to customize your imported templates to remove calls to Stampa:Short description, I suppose you could replace the contents of Stampa:Short description with a tracking category that would tell you which pages are trying to create short descriptions. If you modify those templates, they would stop trying to use the template. The problem will happen again when you import new versions of the templates, of course. I have tried to think of a negative result from blanking the template, and I haven't thought of anything. It is probably the best option. I would leave some documentation in place; feel free to copy some version of this conversation over to the documentation page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 28 September 2023

Reposting this as I realized that I hadn't posted it as an edit request. I've noticed that several short descriptions for Brazilian municipalities use the following format "Municipality in REGION, Brazil". This can be seen in the following articles: São Gabriel da Cachoeira, Tabatinga, Petropolis, etc... While not incorrect, this would be like the Chicago article being "City in Midwest, United States" or the San Francisco article being "City in West Coast, United States". I think these short descriptions are autogenerated from pulling the subdivision_type1 field from the settlement infobox template. I propose instead that it should use the subdivision_type2 field, so that it uses the Brazilian state that the municipality is located in. BaduFerreira (talk) 15:26, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Infobox_settlement&oldid=1177664941"