Template talk:Omaha

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Nebraska / Omaha This template is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States This template is supported by WikiProject Nebraska. This template is supported by WikiProject Nebraska - Omaha. Cities This template is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

So where does Council Bluffs fit in with this? Do I just create a new East section with Council Bluffs as the only suburb/neighborhood? DandyDan2007 08:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should chop the suburbs outta this box and turn this into "Neighborhoods of Omaha", and let the "Metropolitan area of Omaha-Council Bluffs" collect the rest. – Freechild (BoomCha) 22:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I did it - I've eliminated all the suburbs, and added several neighborhoods. More to come. – Freechild (BoomCha) 20:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this navbox yellowish orange? It's using the same color as California, and clashes with the other navboxes at the bottom of the Omaha, Nebraska article. I attempted to match the colors, but my edits were reverted. Per BRD, please discuss here. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mandated, uniform color for templates in any city, and I created this template before California adopted the color for it's templates. Your opinion about it "clashing" is subjective; without an objective rule, I think it should stay yellow. • Freechildtalk 16:15, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] I disagree. Deviations from the default color should only exist if there is a reason for it. This template is placed at the bottom of several articles, including ones like Offutt Air Force Base and Omaha Public Schools. The orange color makes it unnecessarily stand out from the other navigation boxes at the bottom of the page. We shouldn't use colors just because the look pretty, but to convey some level of meaning. We don't need a rainbow at the bottom of the articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:17, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] And that's your subjective opinion. There needs to be a steadfast, objective rule that addresses this, or subjective perspectives will be the reign of the day. That isn't very encyclopedic, is it? • Freechildtalk 17:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] Yes, I believe that arbitrary coloring is not encyclopedic. I will request further comment. Plastikspork (talk) 19:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] I agree this should follow the standard coloring. Although I am not completely opposed to templates having color there are 2 things here that make me think that it should not be. 1st if Nebraska adopted a standard color then this template and others relating to Nebraska should follow it. 2nd, I also think that of all the colors to choose from orange is a bit strong. For people who are affected from color blindness this color may make the template hard to read. --Kumioko (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request:

There isn't a strong argument either way, and it doesn't strike me as an especially major issue to get worked up about. Having said that, unless there's a compelling reason otherwise, it would make sense if it matched the other Nebraskan templates, which currently use the default colour, so that would be my personal recommendation. It might be more useful to obtain input from the many editors at WP:Nebraska, who coordinate pages concerning this state, and may be able to make some more pertinent comments about why the default colour scheme was chosen (if, indeed, there is any reason).—Anaxial (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure either argument is particularly powerful, but if I have to choose between "the colors clash" and "there's no objective rule so I can do whatever I want", I will choose to support the "colors clash" argument, because at least it is an argument. If there is some compelling reason for this to stay bright orange, then please let the community hear it so that we may consider all sides with equally. Right now, I am only seeing one side that sounds valid. LonelyBeacon (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] Comment Not that it matters, but the claim that Freechild "created this template before California adopted the color for it's [sic] templates" appears to be false since (1) Freechild didn't create this template, (2) when Smmurphy created the template, it used "aaccff" and was quickly changed to "ccccff" here, which is the default color for navboxes, the color I am suggesting here, and the color used by the Nebraska templates, (3) the current color for the California template was added in this edit, which is about a year before it was added here with this edit. Again, this is somewhat unrelated, but thought the color history was interesting. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:38, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The background colour of this particular template is unlikely to cause an accessibility problem per se. However, it is a bad idea to have a free-for-all with colours (or any other purely presentational element) because of the effort required to ensure that thousands of different objects meet our accessibility requirements. By keeping a "house" style across the encyclopedia – or at least within a project area – we dramatically reduce the housekeeping needed. Indeed, a new editor can normally use a default template, safe in the knowledge that it is accessible, without having to check its colours against recommendations for readability for example. You only have to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Omaha#Infoboxes to see this one sticking out like a sore thumb. There really is no reason to be setting the titlestyle and belowstyle parameters for this template at all. --RexxS (talk) 02:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the default color should stand (on any horizontal navbox template) unless some not-completely-subjective/arbitrary argument can be made for another color; e.g. I would think the Californian template is colored gold-ish because California is "The Golden State". From what I can tell, Omaha's only emblem is uncolored, so it doesn't appear a similar argument can be made here. --Cybercobra (talk) 02:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Omaha portal was recently deleted. I've removed the red link from the template. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 13:14, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 December 28 § Template:Neighborhoods in Omaha was voted as a merge into this template. @WikiCleanerMan, Lexiconaut, and Vestrian24Bio: you all commented there, so I'm pinging for input. The neighborhood template contained many red links and redirects. Should this template retain those? If not feel to remove them. I did not remove them myself as I don't see it in the TfD discussion. Rjjiii (talk) 00:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EXISTING states:

• Red links should normally be avoided unless they are very likely to be developed into articles that satisfy the general notability guideline or one of the subject-specific notability guidelines, and should not be included where Wikipedia would be serving a non-encyclopedic purpose if articles were created from the red links.
• Red links can be retained in navigation templates that represent a well-defined and complete set of data (geographic divisions, annual events, etc.), where deleting red links would leave an incomplete and misleading result. Even then, editors are encouraged to write the article first.

I do not know if the list of neighborhoods in the template make up a complete set of all neighborhoods in Omaha. If they do, then perhaps bullet #2 applies and the redlinks could stay. If not, then bullet #1 may apply, and the redlinks should be removed. I have neither the time nor the inclination to investigate a list of Omaha's neighborhoods. --Lexiconaut (talk) 03:30, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]