Template talk:Florida ports

Categories

I'm confused by the categorization this template yields. I propose to create Category:Ports and harbors of Florida, and place articles only in that category; that category, in turn, can be placed in Category:Ports and harbors of the United States and Category:Geography of Florida. (Adding it as a sub-category of Category:Water transport is redundant, since Category:Ports and harbors of the United States already belongs to that category (via Category:Ports and harbors -> Category:Ports and harbours by country). Thoughts? -- Tetraminoe 11:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed Category:Water transport from the includes. When you create Category:Ports and harbors of Florida, just replace Category:Ports and harbors of the United States with Category:Ports and harbors of Florida, and the includes will update. Or I can do it. I only included Ports and harbors of the United States because Fl didn't exist yet. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Category:Ports and harbors of the United States, no other state has its own sub-category, so I thought I should ask before creating one for Florida. I'll take your approval as the go-ahead. -- Tetraminoe 11:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Florida has more coastline than any other continental US state. If other states reach a point where they feel a sub cat is indicated, that's their decision. IMHO, FL is a no-brainer for a sub-cat at 1,197 miles and 21 listed ports. California should prolly have a sub-cat, but the people at WP:CAL have not done so, same for Hawaii and Alaska. I might want to go over there and see if they want an infobox also. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template appearance

Why does the name ("Infobox FLPorts") appear in the template itself? I find this a bit unneccesary and ugly. Can we remove it? -- Tetraminoe 11:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No! It has the pagename. Look at any of the port articles, and it shows the name of the port article. See? Is automagically correct name for where you are. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's clever, I should have known that. -- Tetraminoe 11:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

well, its actually redundant, as the article is already going to be bold and black in the list. I did that for asthetic reasons - to balance the bar above the image. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alphebetizing in category

The way the template is set up, all articles using the template will alphebetize in the category under P (for "Port" or "Port of"), rather than stripping the "Port" and alphebetize under the letter of their name (e.g. "Miami" or "Canaveral"). Any ideas for workarounds? -- Tetraminoe 12:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Its not the template, its the alphabetizing. The only way I know to work around is name the articles Name, port of which we could do... KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As the template seems to be acting up, and we have an alphabetizing issue, what do you think of removing the cat include and manually adding the cat to port articles? Fix both problems at once, but is a little more work. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gets the job done, but we have do it by hand. I guess that's OK. -- Tetraminoe 20:39, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was bold and did it for the template and the articles so far. KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name

I propose that we change the name of this template to Template:Florida ports, since

it isn't an infobox, and
"Florida" is clearer than "FL"

I further propose that we set a standard of similar naming for all FL templates. Thoughts? -- Tetraminoe 08:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you do that, be sure to fix template redirects. KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed and redirected. --Tetraminoe 05:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Port St. Lucie

Was Port St. Lucie never a real port? ℬastique▼^parℓer♥^voir♑ 22:26, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template size

The expanded template seems to dominate every article, causing a gap in the text and "looking funny." Is there any way to shrink the template? Smaller type, maybe? Inserting template under the lead? Please consider some form of relief for the reader. Student7 (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]