Template talk:State header: Difference between revisions
(Suggesting another name) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* afaik "region" would be a better naming than "state" | * afaik "region" would be a better naming than "state" | ||
[[User:Midsch|Midsch]] 19:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | [[User:Midsch|Midsch]] 19:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
The name `region' is the name I would use in Italian. Although I called it `state' for two reasons: | |||
# the `region' name is used for Europe (e.g. the region of Italy is Europe) in this wiki. | |||
# it can be used for countries organised in states or provinces or laender, like USA, Germany, Argentina, India, Canada, Brazil and so on. | |||
That said, I have no problem whatsoever with the `regional_header' name. I was just looking for an intermediate structure between Country and City (basically for not having the 20 regions and the 100+ provinces of Italy all linked in the `Italy' header.) | |||
[[User:Trave|Trave]] 21:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:33, 11 January 2010
I'd like to move this template to "template:regional header" for 2 reasons:
- more consistent naming
- afaik "region" would be a better naming than "state"
Midsch 19:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The name `region' is the name I would use in Italian. Although I called it `state' for two reasons:
- the `region' name is used for Europe (e.g. the region of Italy is Europe) in this wiki.
- it can be used for countries organised in states or provinces or laender, like USA, Germany, Argentina, India, Canada, Brazil and so on.
That said, I have no problem whatsoever with the `regional_header' name. I was just looking for an intermediate structure between Country and City (basically for not having the 20 regions and the 100+ provinces of Italy all linked in the `Italy' header.)
Trave 21:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)