|
===[[FIPS place code]] and its subpages===
All right, you bastards, you win, I give up; it's not worth the fight. I wanted to make this place better, but you don't want it. I have deleted the links to the subsidiary pages. Whether you keep or delete the subsidiary pages doesn't matter. I'll null them since it's clear people don't want the fucking things. The original page is simply a table of state entries. Since my contribution is unwanted, I have removed the contribution so as to get rid of the problem. [[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 22:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
This is just the ''tip'' of the iceberg: I look at [[Special:Newpages|New Pages]], and was startled to see entries like "[[FIPS place code/Minnesota]] ('''390,351 bytes''')" and "[[FIPS place code/Arkansas]] ('''311,887 bytes'''). These are HUGE subpages of lists of geographic codes. The creator is stacking 'em up, one by one. Wikipedia is NOT a primary source, and it's NOT a bunch of lists. [[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 07:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
::Wikipedia is ''not'' a primary source. These are taken from the USGS files, simply cut down to be more useful than the raw data. The primary source is the USGS files and the exact same information can be found there. [[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 20:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Good. Then leave them there. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 21:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
** I would like to understand the objections better. Do you object to the inclusion of the material '''at all''', or do you object because of the '''size'''? If the size is an issue, then if there is a consensus, the links for each state can go someplace else such as Wikisource, if it is appropriate. But I think this sort of thing is appropriate and necessary for this encyclopedia. Other (printed) encyclopedias include equivalent content such as lists of cities, thus it is clear that this is standard reference material used elsewhere and thus is appropriate to use here. [[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 21:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Comment''' Wow, I really don't know what ot say. [[User:TKE|<font color="maroon">'''T'''</font>]] [[User talk:TKE|<font color="gray">'''K'''</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/TKE|<font color="maroon">'''E'''</font>]] 08:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
:'''Keep''' It's a government report, relevant information, hell I paid for it. [[User:TKE|<font color="maroon">'''T'''</font>]] [[User talk:TKE|<font color="gray">'''K'''</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/TKE|<font color="maroon">'''E'''</font>]] 08:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' How about: the top [[FIPS place code]] article is good info and the subpages are deletable as [[WP:NOT|not an indiscriminate collector of information]]. [[User:Weregerbil|Weregerbil]] 08:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''': It's sad to see so much effort go to waste, but it's right in [[FIPS place code]] that the original list can be downloaded from an official (presumably up-to-date) source. An article ''about'' FIPS place codes, maybe keeping a manageable amount of place codes as examples, would be an excellent idea. [[User:Peter Grey|Peter Grey]]
**If there was an automated way the place codes could be added to the article for each corresponding ___location, that really be neat. [[User:Peter Grey|Peter Grey]] 08:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
***I'm sure RamBot could do it alongside all his census info. [[User:Night Gyr|Night Gyr]] 17:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
* The top-level info (i.e. that on [[FIPS place code]], rather than its subpages) can added into the InfoBoxes for the various state/territory. The insanely long complete list is not encyclopedic (primary source) and can be covered with an external link to the USGS branch that hands these things out. -- [[User:Gareth Owen|GWO]]
*'''Delete'''. I'm likewise impressed at how much work went into this, but what is here that's not on the gov't link? [[User:RGTraynor|RGTraynor]] 16:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Wikisource is the place for primary sources, so if you want to put this on a wiki, put it up there and link it from here. [[User:Night Gyr|Night Gyr]] 17:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' an article on the FIPS place code system as such, if it is a notable reference system. '''Delete''' the codes themselves, which do not belong in an encyclopedia. — [[User:Haeleth|Haeleth]] <small>[[User_talk:Haeleth|Talk]]</small> 17:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Transwiki''' to Wikisource [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">⇒</font>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[Image:Flag_of_Iceland.svg|18px|]] [[Special:Contributions/Swatjester|<small><sup>Ready</sup></small>]] [[RSTA|<small>Aim</small>]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Armed_Forces|<small><sub>Fire!</sub></small>]] 18:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete:''' we add no value to the world by copying such an immense amount of numeric data; what we do is create a reference which will become out-of-date and therefore misleading. A reference to the primary source is the way to do this. '''Keep''' the top-level article. — [[User:Johantheghost|Johan the Ghost]] [[User talk:Johantheghost|<sub>seance</sub>]] 18:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep top-level article,''' remove tables from its, '''delete subpages.''' FIPS place codes are important in the geographic and demographic industries (such as the Census Bureau, and Claritas where I work), and not otherwise noteworthy. A good two-paragraph article would be appropriate here; the raw tables are not. WP is not for primary sources, excess level of detail, etc. [[User:Barno|Barno]] 21:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep top-level article,''' remove tables from its, '''delete subpages.''' Per Barno and Johan the Ghost. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 13:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' I'm with that. A bot for this would be nice, I didn't even know about government produced rankings. [[User:TKE|<font color="maroon">'''T'''</font>]] [[User talk:TKE|<font color="gray">'''K'''</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/TKE|<font color="maroon">'''E'''</font>]] 19:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Argument in favor by the author''': As I am the person who has created this, I would like to make the case why it should stay as is.
* It is a cut-down version of the complete list, it only includes cities and major unincorporated areas. As is, it just becomes useful as opposed to the complete list which contains practically every ___location in the U.S. bigger than a hot dog stand.
* Where do you draw the line? If you want to set some population figure, say, 50, 100,000 or whatever, fine. But what is the criterion.
* There is the possibility of cutting it by county (borough/census area in Alaska, parish in Louisiana) but I for one am not up to the task of creating circa 3500 separate pages. Now, if you only create separate sub pages if there is several items in a county, but you're still going to have large pages.
*Most of the bloat comes from having to code them for HTML. I think I could try changing them to flat text and they would be a lot smaller. Actually I wish I had thought of that. I'll see if there isn't a way to have both.
* I think this is exactly appropriate for an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia should provide, well, ''encyclopedic'' content, which I would think means it should provide very broad coverage of a subject or an issue. This also includes providing substantial reference material.
[[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 20:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
* I am looking at reformatting the pages. I use a program to create them. I think if I use a wiki table format instead of HTML I can cut the page sizes by about 1/2. But the data within them is still substantial; take a look at a test version I have reformatted for [[FIPS place code/Minnesota|Minnesota]] and it went from 380K down to 140K. I can see some places for improvement.
*The creation of these tables was a start, and was subject to improvements later on as I - and others - had more experience in how to work with them.
[[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 21:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:*''Where do you draw the line?'' How about "none at all?" Seems simplest.
** None at all is not acceptable and you are incorrect. This is an encyclopedia; there are other tables of content included here. If this is not acceptable, then most of the other tables should also be excluded for the same reason. Perhaps that is the case but arguing an encyclopedia should exclude reference material (which is one of the reasons for using an encyclopedia) is ridiculous. My guess is if you looked at any number of printed full encyclopedias you would find lists of this type. If you want to argue that encyclopedias should not contain reference lists, that's another matter. What is your premise to argue that we should not include reference material which is relevant? Or are you claiming that a list of places in the U.S. is not relevant to this encyclopedia? [[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 21:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:*''Most of the bloat comes from having to code them for HTML'' It doesn't matter whether it comes from too much starch in their diet or from not enough exercise: they are still a form of raw data that is NOT encyclopedic, IS a primary source of data best handled by an external link to the data supplier, and is grossly inappropriate here. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]]
21:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
**Again, sir you are incorrect. This is, again, ''not'' the primary source of the data. It is a use of the primary data which is the exact same data extracted from the USGS data tables. They are the primary source. [[User:Rfc1394|Paul Robinson]] 21:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
| 