Template talk:City of Buffalo, New York

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

New York (state): Western NY

	New York (state) portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
	This template is supported by WikiProject Western New York.

Untitled

This template is not really laid out correctly for its purpose. I simply added things in the style of the template. The template should really look more like {{Chicago}} or {{Detroit}} with more general topics. I added specific topics in keeping with the style of the template, which is not to say that I endorse the template.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We should get rid of the template or make it look more like the templates for other American cities (see Cleveland and Detroit) --Danreitz (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"People" section"

I accidentally hit Enter when I began typing in my edit summary here. What I was going to say was that the People section is entirely WP:OR because an editor arbitrarily chose people who happened to be in Category:People from Buffalo, New York. There was no rhyme or reason other than that editor's whim, and for that reason it must be entirely removed. This is not radical what I am doing - dozens of other navboxes have had these sections remove for the same reason. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daemen College

I re-added Daemen College because this template is for the entire metro area. If we limited it to just the city of Buffalo them half the places on the list would have to be deleted. We include all of the malls and amusement parks, none of which are in the city, why not Daemen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.231.233.247 (talk) 01:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me the purpose of the template is too vague. If you go to Detroit's page there is a template for the City of Detroit and another for the Metro area. There is a fight on this template with adding area sites and keeping them confined to sites within the City of Buffalo. I for one think this template should be renamed "City of Buffalo" to focus its scope. Eric Ando (talk) 01:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My position is that if the template is going to be for just the city, then everything outside the city has to be deleted including all the malls, airports, and amusement parks. I'd rather see the template be for the whole metro area, I don't think there is enough in just the city to justify a separate template. If the template is going to be for the whole metro area then colleges in the suburbs, like Daemen should be included. Tommycw1 insists on deleting Daemen while keeping places much farther from the city like Darien Lake. My attempts to add Daemen or delete non-city items are always reverted. I would really appreciate it if he could explain his position, that way we could figure out a way of resolving this issue.72.231.233.247 (talk) 03:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear non-logged in random user 72.231.233.247: 5 years ago an RFC was held to settle this exact same question. Please see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Buffalo,_New_York/Archive_3#Not_in_Buffalo and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Buffalo,_New_York#Suburban_schools. Note Daemon College is specifically on a list showing what schools are not in Buffalo, does not list itself as being in Buffalo and does not even use the Buffalo template. I will continue to revert your vandalism which is in conflict with this RFC. Tommycw1 (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents: Correctly call the template "Great Buffalo-Niagara region", or "Buffalo and surrounding area". The wording doesn't say anything about the surrounding area being included. --Allamericanbear (talk) 19:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Defunct Shopping Malls?

Should these really be listed in the template? I think they have next to no historical significance warranting their inclusion in the template.Eric Ando (talk) 02:20, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I created this template

Lo and behold, it appears as though I was actually the person who asked for this template to be made in 2007 with an old account that I no longer have the password to. Buffaboy ^talk 00:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Organization and classification

This template has some issues related to the classification of individual items.

The items listed in the "Area attractions" section seem arbitrarily chosen, and I don't understand its distinction from "Entertainment". The section title invites too broad of a potential scope.
Almost nothing in the "Regional military and municipal" section fits that description, outside of the link to Buffalo City Hall.
Most of the items under "Other" could find a home if we tweak some section titles, and possibly add one more.

To address these issues, I propose:

Changing the "Entertainment" section title to "Arts, entertainment, and sports". This section could then host the various sports venues currently listed under "Regional military and municipal" and "Other", as well as the "Area attractions".
Remove the vague "Area attractions" section, which would now be redundant.
Change "Regional military and municipal" to simply "Government", and place various city/regional/federal gov topics and buildings there. Move ECMC to "Other" or remove.
Add a "Parks and public spaces" section, which would receive many items currently in "Other" and could be easily expanded with extant articles for other parks within the city.
Remove links to Duff's and Anchor Bar, as they appear to non-Buffalonians as arbitrarily chosen commercial establishments in a city full of them. I understand their connection to the Buffalo wing, so I think it would be better to replace these two commercial links with a link to the wing article instead.

I feel the above is (hopefully) a fairly non-controversial start to improving the utility of this navbox. Any thoughts are appreciated, and I'll wait at least a week before undertaking any changes to allow others to raise objections or suggestions. Thanks! Antepenultimate (talk) 19:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As there were no objections, I've completed the above changes. Antepenultimate (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link to deleted portal removed

The Buffalo, New York portal was recently deleted. I've removed the red link from the template. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:51, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]