Template talk:Geocoding-systems

Many postal codes could be entered - what to do?

There is a long list of country-specific postal codes at List of postal codes, with just a subset on this template at time of writing. Do we want all, some or none, with a redirect to that page, in the template? Just thinking around this issue, and how best to deal with it... Tony 1212 (talk) 02:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Singulars versus plurals - inconsistencies

Hmm... some of the entries used in this template - presumably reflecting article titles as they have been created, are singular, some plural. Would it be desirable to (attempt to) rationalise to one or the other?

E.g. currently (Oct 2021) the first line reads "MARC country codes | SGC codes (Canada)" but the second includes "IATA airport code | ICAO airport code". Then later we have (e.g.) "Marsden Square" and "Natural Area Code" (singular), but "WMO Squares" and "ICES Statistical Rectangles" (plural), both of which (last 2) I plead guilty to having created myself, in 2006 and 2021, respectively. Then later we have "United Kingdom post codes", "IOC country codes", and so on.

Is it worth worrying about this, at all? There is some guidance at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals), and possibly this has been raised elsewhere and I have not found it. In the link just given, one possibly relevant example reads: "Things like Skew coordinates. Although one may speak of the second skew coordinate of a point, the article is on the system of coordinates." One could thus argue, for example, that things like "United Kingdom post codes" refers to the system by which individual post codes are allocated, not to any particular post code, same with "MARC country codes" and perhaps most of the rest as well...

Thoughts welcome... Regards - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

National Grids...?

In my mind there is a sort of philosophical overlap between some sets of identifiers such as Marsden Squares, WMO Squares, ICES Statistical Rectangles etc. and the largest squares of national grids such as Ordnance Survey National Grid in that both types can be used as identifiers for "squares on the ground" and similar. Yet national grids seem to be out of scope - just wondering if this is conceptually sound or not... any discussion welcome! Regards Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 06:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Selected National Grids added on 29 October 2021, refer next section Tony 1212 (talk) 18:07, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Non notable inclusions

Hi, I am not sure that "Munich Orientation Convention" merits a place on this list since it has no Wikipedia article and appears to be non-notable, except for an entry on the "inventor's" home page i.e. http://www.volksnav.de/_NewHP/ ... similarly Geotude, whose home page has disappeared (http://www.geotude.com/), although it did apparently exist in 2006 (archived version) - again scarcely meets WP criteria for notability, I would say. Then there is an entry "SALB" with no explanation - maybe this is "the Second Administrative Level Boundaries data set (SALB) names and codes" as mentioned in the document https://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/whsgpsgeosubsetprotocolforthegenerationofthegeosubset.pdf, if so, appears to be a program of the UN as documented at https://www.unsalb.org/, but hardly a set of geocodes; if anything, a clearinghouse/directory for accessing boundary datasets held by member countries, refer https://www.unsalb.org/data . Again, thoughts?? - Regards, Tony Rees Tony 1212 (talk) 05:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

OK, I have removed the non notable and/or irrelevant examples as above, namely Geotude, Munich Orientation Convention, SALB, also HASC, which seem to be one person's suggestion (http://www.statoids.com/ihasc.html) but again no notability established and no WP article. Then as foreshadowed above, added "Ordnance Survey National Grid (UK)" to "Geodesic Place Codes", where they sit next to "National Topographic System (Canada)". Hope this is OK, also addresses additional points above or below. Tony 1212 (talk) 18:37, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

More questions

Apologies if I am talking to myself here, but is there any good reason why " FIPS country code (FIPS 10-4) | FIPS place code (FIPS 55) | FIPS county code (FIPS 6-4) | FIPS state code (FIPS 5-2)| SGC codes | National Topographic System (Canada)", currently under "Geodesic place codes: Regional", should not be up top, under "Administrative codes", as per others in that category (ONS codes (United Kingdom) | MARC country codes | SGC codes (Canada), etc.)? Tony 1212 (talk) 05:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I did not check all FIPS refs, but the ones I saw are not geophysical in nature, but just administrative. Feeel free to move them there.−Woodstone (talk) 08:23, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Now moved... Tony 1212 (talk) 18:38, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Also taken the liberty of removing the category "Sport", since it duplicates entries already present in "Country Codes". As I see it, entries belong to one category or another, there is no point in re-categorising and repeating the entries once more... Tony 1212 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2021 (UTC)