Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. counties

We're more than halfway to the next census, and we still don't have 2010 census data up for every county? This is completely ridiculous. 71.175.243.119 (talk) 02:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Submissions
--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:32, 6 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated List of parishes in Louisiana for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

Hi, I noticed that most counties use a [Template:Infobox_U.S._county] template and the counties in California use a [Template:Infobox_settlement] instead. Should this be standardized to the county template for infoboxes? Also, are there any other templates I could expect to run into for counties?

Also, I noticed that counties in Alaska do not contain an infobox period. I am in the process of writing a bot for counties infoboxes CensusBot and I would like to add a check in there, so that if it doesn't find any infoboxes to just add one with the parameter that I am trying to add as well as county and state name. Would this be okay?

Another observation I made is regarding population values in these infoboxes. I notice that some contain the decennial census population number and some contain the 2016 yearly population estimate. Some of them contain both as well. Is there a standard that should be followed regarding this? I am inclined to go with only putting the most recent yearly population estimate in the infobox, especially since there are historical census numbers in each county from what I have seen (so it is redundant). My plan was to write these yearly population estimate values for counties just as my bot just did for States. Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks. Sasan-CDS (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia has evolved over time. Initially, a generic template might be broadly used because a "specific" template didn't exist. I'm not sure how things evolved back in the day, since I didn't start editing until 2010, but it seems as though some states must have started using the "Geobox" template earlier, such as Illinois, for example La Harpe, Illinois, then later people came back and started converting larger cities, like Chicago, over to the "Infobox settlement", but Illinois editors haven't gone through the effort to convert every community over to it yet. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Sbmeirow: Would it be a problem if my bot added the "infobox settlement" template to the counties without an infobox present? I would have it mostly just add basic information (county, state, and population estimate figure). Sasan-CDS (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Not sure, I guess it wouldn't hurt, but others should give opinion too. When I add any type of infobox, I try to fill in everything.

Overall, the design of the "Infobox U.S. county" template SUCKS compared to the "Infobox settlement" template. For example, in the county template, the census is either decennial census or estimate census, but NOT both like in the better settlement template, and this needs to be fixed. Other aspects of the settlement template should be migrated over to the U.S. county template too. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Sbmeirow: Cool, thanks, this is good information and that does make sense. This is why I was asking what would make more sense (both or one). So, for now, it sounds like the best approach would be for me to just update the estimate in the "infobox settlement" templates and replace the decennial with the estimate numbers in the "infobox U.S. county" templates? Does this make sense? Sasan-CDS (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

FYI, the ONLY official source for U.S. census numbers is census.gov but some people try to use other sources, which is the WRONG WAY. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Sbmeirow: That makes sense. Well, not only am I using official Census numbers, but I am also representing the Census Bureau directly for this bot so you can count on my numbers being accurate. My bot should check over everything and correct anything that is inaccurate (as well as the reference back to the Census Bureau). Sasan-CDS (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

For your BOT, please use some test cases from all of the 50 states, before you turn your BOT lose on 100% of the counties. Thanks! • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Sbmeirow: Sure, I can do that. I'm assuming I will have to go through another approval process to run this anyway. I can try and link to this conversation in my request and include you for review if you like. Thanks. Sasan-CDS (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good, include me. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:15, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I am only one person. You need to get feedback from others. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:15, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

While going through the various lists of the counties in each state, I have noticed that the sources of their figures for population and area vary from state to state. For example, some use total area (including water) (e.g. Michigan) while others use land areas (such as most states). To compound the issues, some of the figures for land area come from the 2000 census rather than 2010 (e.g. Florida). On top of that, the population figures come from widely different sources; some come from the 2010 census (e.g. Arkansas, though there the figures are not sourced to census.gov), while others use post-2010 estimates (though many such estimates are severely outdated; North Carolina, for example, uses 2011 estimates). I propose that we standardize such lists so that all of them have population and area figures from the same source. Although it seems obvious that the area figures used should be the land area figures from 2010, I am unsure about which population figures to use. While the 2016 estimates are more current, I question both their credibility and the ability of the Wikipedia community to update the population figures on a yearly basis, so think the 2010 Census data may be preferable. Any thoughts? Us441 (talk to me) (My piece) 20:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

I recommend the decade census, but first this template needs to be changed, as I stated on June 22, 2017. The current county template "Infobox U.S. county" only supports one census, where as the "Infobox settlement" supports two census (decade year + estimate year). I recommend the county template be changed to support two, in a similar way as the settlement template. The field names should be agreed upon before making changes. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 22:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your response. However, I was referring to the information on counties found not in their articles, but in the tables in the state lists such as List of counties in Florida and List of counties in Texas. For those tables, do you think it would be a good idea to include two separate columns for the decade population and the estimate population? Us441 (talk to me) (My piece) 11:50, 9 July 2017 (UTC)Reply