OK this template is not quite right, but am not attempting to repair as am unsure what it is supposed to be like. In essence someone has taken the trouble to add a complementary silver hue to the box but also the notable section looks like it should not be part of geography. --Fleanetha (talk) 17:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Standardized the color. Re: "the notable section looks like it should not be part of geography," are you saying the notable places should be its own group instead of a subgroup of geography? Like we do in the other navboxes with a Points of Interest group, as below?
- I hate that shade of blue. It contrasts so horribly with with neutral earthtones we use everywhere else on the site. I'd much rather see gray used for all subgroup backgrounds myself, but I guess that's a discussion for another place.— Yoda8myhead (talk) 21:24, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- As we have Locations and Geography as separate category branches, I have tended to follow a rule that man- (or other creature-) made elements are treated separately from natural elements. This does seems to be common practice on the wiki. So what you have above is good. As to the colour, I like a complementary colour to that in the flag / crest etc. so liked the silver. I have updated on the page. --Fleanetha (talk) 19:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)