Fort Towson

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Size split?

Split - Article is over 100 kB and should be split off. Thoughts?--Jax 0677 (talk) 03:04, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree wholeheartedly.....I'm fine with whatever works.....Pvmoutside (talk) 14:54, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I were King I would split the Continental Congress from the U S House simply for the sake of accuracy even though it would not impact the size alot
    • This list only includes reps from the US Congress. The Continental Congress reps should be placed on another list...Pvmoutside (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JGVR (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Additionally it could be set up like
    surnames beginning with [A][B][C][D] and maybe even [1st congress][2nd Congress][3rd Congress][4th Congress] or both
    JGVR (talk) 01:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You should follow other states lists for formatting (PA, MA are good examples). I would support an alphabetical breakdown but not support a district one...Pvmoutside (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JGVR (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redux

This page currently has 420,401 bytes of markup; it's far too big. What's the best way to divide it up? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:05, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have removed a useless section (list of living members), but that was only a 2% reduction (down to 412,762 bytes). I removed overlinking, which was a further 23% reduction (down to 318,226 bytes). The rules about article length generally do not apply to lists, see WP:SPLITLIST. There is no good way to split this list: alphabetical, chronological, or geographical would be arbitrary and would prevent the usefulness of being able to see all the members together. That is, one COULD split the list but then the real value of the list is gone. Therefore, I suggest we not split this article and if it's still a problem other methods of reduction should be considered. —GoldRingChip 18:07, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The rules about article length generally do not apply to lists..." This claim is false, but even if it were not, the overriding concern is the effect on our readers, not some "rules". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok… I suggest we follow the guidance where other people have developed a consensus about good ideas for when articles are too big, specifically Wikipedia:Article size, specifically WP:SPLITLIST: "Lists, tables, and other material that is already in summary form may not be appropriate for reducing or summarizing further by the summary style method. If there is no "natural" way to split or reduce a long list or table, it may be best to leave it intact, and a decision made to either keep it embedded in the main article or split it off into a stand-alone page. Regardless, a list or table should be kept as short as is feasible for its purpose and scope. Too much statistical data is against policy." That's why I've tried to reduce it as much as possible (by 24%) as there is no natural way to split it. —GoldRingChip 15:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Size merge?

I'd like to reconstitute this as a single list.—GoldRingChip 16:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of United States Representatives from New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move

@Cupper52: List of US Representatives from New York was moved to List of US Representatives from New York, but all the other states and lists of senators were left unmoved.

Should:

  • A) they ALL be moved;
  • B) SOME be moved and others left as is; or
  • C) this move be REVERTED? —GoldRingChip 13:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldRingChip: A. –Cupper52Discuss! 13:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Cupper52: Why should they all be abbreviated? I think MOS:ACROTITLE implies that "United States" should be written out. "US" could be used if necessary as a disambiguator, but that's not the case here. —GoldRingChip 14:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Name sorting

The table sorts by first name rather than by last. Changing this would likely require significant effort, though, and would further increase the size of the page. Still, for usability reasons it should probably be done. Powers T 15:37, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_United_States_representatives_from_New_York