This template is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I still don't see how it improves the template at all. There's no break really in the sense of the words so why should there be in the layout? Is this due to some standard layout rule I am not aware of?Munci (talk)21:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to edits such as this one:[1]? If so, the break's purpose is to correct this: "Christian Americans (". IOW, to keep the open parenthesis from appearing at the end of the line, detached from the content it encloses. Comparethis no-break version with thewith-break version.SamEV (talk)21:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I think we're using different browsers or something like that because, for me, the bracket in that part of the template is nowhere near the end of the line at all. Is there no easier way to stop that happening? Is there no a way to use Template:Nowrap for this or anything like that? If not, might be an idea to another break elsewhere: I see Black Americans ( at the end of its line.Munci (talk)21:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think "<br/>" is plenty easy, and results in no substantive change to the content, and only improves the presentation. But if you think a different method is better, give it a try. Good luck.SamEV (talk)22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The template was organized according to geographical origin, not by race. I'm not against re-shuffling the template so that it better reflects US racial delineations. But if we're going by continent, it would make no sense to place Middle Easterners/North Africans under the European umbrella.
Therefore, I attempted tomodify the template so that those classified as Asian Americans are within their own grouping, those that would be classified under the MENA ethnicity that was proposed, are within their own grouping. And for better or for worse the Romani which I do not fall into either grouping are left on their own.
I propose that reporting of this demographic is sexist. In order to get with the times I propose that simply listing “single homeowner” as a better demographic if it needs to be reported at all.Juliekagy (talk)23:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
