Template talk:city

Deletion debate
Not a context, plus the usage is really bad and I can't see how to revise it. You get stuff like


 * 1)  Amsterdam

Which is actually confusing, not helpful. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Convert to plain categories. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 01:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Meaning what, sorry? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What we have been doing for the other non-context templates that look/act like context templates, removing the context tag on each entry and putting a at the foot of the entry. Once orphaned, delete the template. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 16:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete (just thought I'd say it in bold). Mglovesfun (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Any keepers for this?? Mglovesfun (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep all geographic toponym-type templates (or at least the categories) to facilitate work by advocates of gazetteer entries. It would be fine with me if the context tags themselves were invisible for now. If there are reasons to distinguish toponym senses (eg, New York: state, county, city, SMSA), then retaining the sense-specific information that is the placement of the tag against a specific sense seems potentially worthwhile. IMHO, generally, any tag or category that provides scaffolding for such a large-scale development effort should not be removed until such time as the effort decides it does not need it or it becomes clear that there is no such effort and won't be for the foreseeable future. We are not yet at that point. I would favor increased use of such tags until the gazetteer project is resolved. If it will be a perennial issue, then it will never be a good time to remove them. DCDuring TALK 17:52, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And do what with it? It's incredibly confusing and it's not clear to me how to fix that. Changing the head word to geography doesn't help much either IMO. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep it and use it until the advocates of toponyms get their act together or the project is rejected or rendered obsolete by developments. DCDuring TALK 18:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that we don't have but you can find  on a few entries. Along those lines, we don't have,  (etc.) and  failed RFD earlier this week. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * This template is currently in ZERO entries, and is in 2! DCD, has someone told you that they plan to use this template, or are you planning a project that needs it? —Michael Z. 2010-03-29 22:08 z 

Delete This is not a restricted-use label. Replace it with an invisible Category:Cities.

What's the point of a gazetteer tag? Wikipedia has categories and lists of cities that can be gleaned. Our CFI doesn't clearly allow most such place names for inclusion, and we certainly don't an extensive list of individual places ready to go. —Michael Z. 2010-03-23 23:31 z 
 * Fails, noting that DCDuring declined my invitation to say what a 'sense-level marker of a semantic category' is. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)