Template talk:Geography of Hong Kong

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconGeography Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconHong Kong Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Hong Kong To-do:

Attention needed (60)

Collaboration needed

Improvement needed

Cleanup needed

Image needed (344)

Destub needed

Deorphan needed

Page creation needed

Miscellaneous tasks

The faint writing[edit]

I can hardly make it out. Can we make it either very visible, or better still, get rid of it? The line directly below says the same thing "Geography of Hong Kong". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cropping out the faint words will leave flower chopped off at the bottom. Maybe use File:Flowers I IMG 2101.jpg instead. It's the official flower and the right shape. Also, why is the box green? Red is way more Hong Kongish, no? And it would match the flower pic. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caregorise?[edit]

I think this template needs some headings to group the different links together more logically. I would tentatively suggest:

  • Physical Environment
    • Land
    • Water
    • Flora
    • Fauna
  • Human Environment
    • Rural
    • Urban
  • Climate

I think we could quite easily fit all the current links into those 3 main categories, and then into the proposed subcategories. Thoughts? Kdm852 (talk) 07:03, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]