Template talk:United States Congress
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Markles, I noticed your new template and wanted to direct you to the one that I also had made earlier today: (Template:United States Capitol Complex). I have a great interest in architecture, especially government buildings, and I was going to just go ahead and add the one I made to the applicable articles, but decided not to till I got feedback from everyone else on the project talk page (here). Do you think we could take the buildings off the template you made, and use the one I made strictly for the Capitol Complex articles? I plan on adding a lot more minor buildings to the complex template, so if we keep them on the USCongress template it may start to get cluttered....any thoughts? --ScottyBoy900Q00:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. Frankly, when I grossly expandedTemplate:Congresslists I knew I was opening a can of worms. I wish it could have everything Congress-related in it, but then it would be too big.
I generally prefer boxes without images and with minimal white space. This means have the links be as plain, short, clear as possible without anything extra that's unnecessary. For example, compareTemplate:USCongressCommittees withTemplate:CapitolComplex (find them below). It's just my opinion; it hardly means I'm right. Let's discuss.
Here's the pros & cons of having more (Let's discuss):
I would love to put all these resources together in one box.
--Markles18:44, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
| Majority Leaders of the United States House of Representatives |  | |||
| Payne |Underwood |Kitchin |Mondell |Longworth |Tilson |Rainey |Byrns |Bankhead |Rayburn |McCormack |Halleck |McCormack |Halleck |McCormack |Albert |Boggs |O'Neill |Wright |Foley |Gephardt |Armey |DeLay |Blunt | ||||
| SeeWikiProject U.S. Congress for more Congress Related Articles | ||||
Would anyone mind if we add a link to the"US_Congress_by_State" template (or to a wikipage based upon/containing it) to the first line of the"mega"- template? Currently, there are separate listings for the Senate and the House, and separate links for current and former members within each. The Senate does show a link for "Current & Former by state", but I think it would be good to have some sort of easy way to access entire Past & Present Delegations by State, given that the trend across the actual wikipages seems to be merging the "current", "former", "Senate", and "House" listings into single pages by State. Any thoughts? --Ross23:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the other templates:
Template:USCongressCommittees:
Template:US_Congress_by_State:
Template:Congresslists(before I expanded it):
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Members | House:Current,Former | Senate:Current,Former,Current and former by state, tenure, and party | |||
| Groups | Congress:African Americans,Asian Pacific Americans | Senate:Women | |||
| Officers | House:Speakers | Senate:Presidents,Presidents pro tempore,Party leaders | |||
| Employees | House:Chaplains,Pages | Senate:Chaplains,Pages | |||
| Politics | Vice Presidents' tie-breaking votes | |||
Are deaths by year links really necessary in this template? This template is already huge as it is, and adding more such links doesn't really help. I think that a better solution is to keep the latest year's link, and then link to the relevant "Deaths by year" category for members of congress. There's no reason the template needs to contain every single link related to congress. --CapitalR (talk)15:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done - To cut down on the clutter, I removed each individual year link and replaced them with 1 link to anew page which has summary tables that link to the original pages. I also made a newtemplate which will provide clean and easy navigation between current and future deaths pages.RoadView (talk)00:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]Have added theOld Brick Capitol and years to the two former sites already listed (Federal Hall as 1789-1790 and Congress Hall as 1790-1800), which cover the template subject and term 'United States Congress', but should the six sites of the Continental Congresses be added as well? I've just added five appropriate sites to the{{Government of the United States under the Articles of Confederation}} template. The complete list would include:
Since the 'History' section includes a link to 'Continental Congress' I thought of adding them, then decided that adding five to the Article of Confederation template may cover it (although Carpenter's Hall is left out), but per template subject of 'United States Congress' thought that a talk page discussion should take as the Continental Congress starting in 1776 was still a United States Congress under the descriptor.Randy Kryn (talk)13:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
Please remove the links toList of living former United States senators andList of living former members of the United States House of Representatives, as those articles were deleted.2601:241:300:B610:F1BA:AEF9:9050:8993 (talk)22:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
| Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
The wiki link in the “Legislative Offices” section pointing toUnited States Congress Office of Compliance should be updated to point toOffice of Congressional Workplace Rights and the office name updated.140.147.2.1 (talk)21:57, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done —PlanetJuice (talk •contribs)19:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply] | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
You now have a list about members of the94th United States Congress, so remember to add this.24.46.53.73 (talk)19:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
| Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
Someone should do a list of the state delegation duos in the U.S. Senate by longevity (for at least 20 years or more) and brevity (for either at least 10 or 6 years or less) of service they spent together, this year.24.46.59.173 (talk)20:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please providereliable sources that support the change you want to be made.-Lemonaka21:12, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply] | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
You might want to add two Senate-exclusive articles, a list on how long they served together, since the Senate has two senators from each state, add a list of Senate state delegation duos by longevity of service (20+ years), and the list of Senate pairs who served together for over 20 years will include current pairs, like alist of members of Congress who served for over 36 years. Don’t forget to add a list of Senate state delegation duos by brevity of service (2- years), and the list of Senate pairs who served together for less than 2 years will exclude current pairs and Senate pairs who briefly served together in the73rd United States Congress, like alist of members of Congress who either served for less than 2 years in the House or served for less than 6 years in the Senate as well.24.46.59.173 (talk)21:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
| Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
You didn’t make a list of new members of the93rd United States Congress, yet.24.46.59.173 (talk)13:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
| Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
You should to a list of U.S. Senators who served, just a single term (6 years or less).2600:1017:B83C:50EF:65AC:2EDA:F903:8741 (talk)22:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template. If you would like, you can create such a draft article yourself.Tollens (talk)06:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
Can you please update this? We are now in the 119th Congress.2601:40A:8400:1820:A475:80CF:17BE:5E8B (talk)00:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Already done'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk •contribs)01:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
