Template talk:Lycoming County, Pennsylvania
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Bodies of water
I think that bodies of water could be added to this template. Is their a wiki policy against adding bodies of water to county templates? Dincher 22:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know of a specific policy, but limited the template to municipalities in the spirit of WP:NAV Paragraph 1; keeping templates to a manageable size. If we include bodies of water, where do you draw the line? Why not include other geographic features....then suddenly the template is over-sized and reduces its usefulness. If there's going to be a template with bodies of water, I think it should be a new template with a name like {{Bodies of water in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania}} or {{Natural geography of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania}}. VerruckteDan 22:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I hadn't considered how much it could grow. Dincher 22:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- I had thought about making a nav box for the West Branch Susquehanna River (or maybe the whole Susquehanna River) and there are two early and incomplete attempts at the bottom of my User:Ruhrfisch/Sandbox. I like the second (bottom) one better - what do you think? Ruhrfisch 01:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I like the looks of the 2nd template. VerruckteDan 02:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I second the 2nd Dincher 20:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks - I am not sure how to include tributaries of the tributaries (they are in parentheses following the main trib now). The first template is based on the one for the Potomac River. The West Branch tribs in the second nav box is also nowhere near complete. I will work on it as I can but am pretty busy right now. Ruhrfisch 04:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I like the looks of the 2nd template. VerruckteDan 02:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I had thought about making a nav box for the West Branch Susquehanna River (or maybe the whole Susquehanna River) and there are two early and incomplete attempts at the bottom of my User:Ruhrfisch/Sandbox. I like the second (bottom) one better - what do you think? Ruhrfisch 01:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I hadn't considered how much it could grow. Dincher 22:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

