Template talk:Massachusetts
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Template_talk:Massachusetts".

	Massachusetts portal Massachusetts is part of WikiProject Massachusetts, an effort to create, expand, and improve Massachusetts-related articles to a feature-quality standard. For more information on this project or to get involved see the WikiProject Massachusetts project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

List of cities

If you are dissatisfied with the list of cities, please add or remove individual cities, not the entire list. I included the list based on what I saw on other state templates (notably California, New York, and Michigan).

For now, I have decided to use the original listing (with the addition of Lawrence). This was before I had decided to add more cities (based on the list from the Massachusetts article, which didn't have a set criteria).Pentawing 04:24, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

This template is a beast

This template is just huge and unwieldy, and I think it needs to be chopped down to size, though I'm loathe to do unilaterally. Does it make sense to have a smaller, general Mass template with just the the main article, Boston, and a few other things, and then have seperate templates for Mass cities, Mass counties, and Mass towns? I think it would improve the visual look of the Mass articles. For an example of what I'm talking about look at the Template:Texas and Template talk:Texas. Comments? Friejose 21:32, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

That'd be great. When I started adding the towns, I noticed it becoming larger and larger, but I didn't want to split it since I didn't originate the template. At the same time, being from a town, I didn't want to remove the towns. [halo] Any way you'd like to split it is fine by me, but that's just one man's opinion. Sahasrahla 04:06, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

I was bold and removed the town list. It's not that I don't want the list, it's just that it's huge and unmanageable. If someone wants to create the List of towns in Massachusetts and add a link to it in the template, I think that would be fine. -Harmil 11:32, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

It's definitely huge, but hardly unmanageable (although, we'll note that I've yet to finish the list...). I agree that it needed to be removed, and will eventually create a template for it. Sahasrahla 14:08, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Why a template, and not an article? Lists are common enough, and a list of towns could even include Census Designated Places and major locations like Round Hill, Massachusetts, just to pick on one I care about. That way, you could just have a link to the town list in this template. Nice and clean, and less text pulled into each article.... -Harmil 14:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I created a List of towns in Massachusetts article. It's far from done, but its a start. I'm going to add a link to the list in the template. Friejose 14:48, 22 August 2005 (UTC) I feel that the list of towns should exist but the all 301 towns should be listed on the template. This although making the template very large it makes it an easier system to used. I sugesst that the template page be put back in vcelloho 14:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

List of regions

I think Markles has made a good start as to regions. I think we don't need to, and shouldn't, try to conform the regions listed to some external list, like Census-delimited areas or something. One of the things that makes Mass. different and unique is that it has historical regions that are more meaningful than counties, or other types of artifical subdivisions. Perhaps one additional area that could be added is the Blackstone Valley, although the article needs to be written first. — Friejose 12:51, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I think that we also need to include the Quabbin Valley. I'll bang out a quick article. Dunkelza 13:59 September 11, 2005 (EDT)

Color of first column

I've just reverted pentawing's edit to remove the colors from the first column of the template. I did so, not to edit war with P., but because I'd like to see some discussion first. There are many different approaches. Template:California Has a striped look. Template:New York goes the way that P. was suggesting. And, of course the original version that I reverted to has a side-bar like look. The reason that I like this version is that it gives some visual isolation to the content of the template, while offsetting the grid. I really don't like tables with grids in them, but at least suggesting the grid seems to help the eye follow what's going on. The California version does this even moreso, but I think it goes overboard and ends up looking like old greenbar. -Harmil 02:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm with Harmil on this, and I was the user who added the color to the sidebar originally. I just think it cleanly separates the relevant info from the descriptive headers without being visually distracting (as I think Cal's template is). On the other hand, it's not worth getting into an edit war over, so I defer to the group's judgment. – Friejose 13:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

In terms of the background color in the first column, I just found out that the Florida template does the same so I won't revert again. On the otherhand, the style that I tried to revert to is used at other state templates (e.g. all other New England states and Washington, which was the style I converted the entire Massachusetts template to in the first place. The MA template was once in the other dominant style, such as the one used for Michigan). Anyways, I would like to see a standard style used for most state templates, so that was what I was trying to get at recently, instead of each state having its own individually styled template. Pentawing 22:30, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

U.S. state templates

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates lists and displays all 50 U.S. state (and additional other) templates. It potentially can be used for ideas and standardization. //MrD9 07:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Standardization of state templates

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding standardization of state templates (primarily regarding layout and styling) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates. An effort was made earlier this year to standardize Canadian province templates (which mostly succeeded). Lovelac7 and I have already begun standardizing all state templates. If you have any concerns, they should be directed toward the discussion page for state template standardization. Thanks! — Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 22:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Towns

I continue to maintain that listing towns as a "topic" is insufficient. Perhaps we should reconsider listing all the towns. See Template:New Hampshire. Sahasrahla 19:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Complete?

I don't think the list of cities is complete. What about Canton? –Llama man 23:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, it's a town. –Llama man 23:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

South Coast and South Shore

I have deleted the South Coast and South Shore links with Southeatstern Massachusetts. The Southeastern Massachusetts definition encompasses those two areas and paints a better picture of Southeastern Massachusetts as a whole (excluding Cape Cod). I did that to make this template less "beast," in response to user Friejose. Please try the Southeastern Massachusetts link, I think you'll enjoy it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.211.197 (talk)

(An aside: Please sign your posts with four tildes, i.e. ~~~~.)

I'd rather see "South Shore" and "South Coast" back in, in addition to Southeastern Mass. Both terms are widely used. If you asked the average Massachusetts person to make a list of geographic regions that comprise the state, both would be on the list. "Southeastern Massachusetts" doesn't encompass "South Shore" and "South Coast" any more than listing Suffolk County encompasses (and obviates the need to list) Boston. My two cents. _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>```} 20:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

One more thing: It's also worth noting that Southeastern Massachusetts is usually defined as being outside Greater Boston -- that is, not including the close-in suburbs (our definition says it extends into Norfolk County only as far as the Rhode Island border towns). This leaves out a substantial amount of what is often called South Shore, such as Quincy, Holbrook, Cohassett, etc. _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>```} 20:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)