The alphabetical listing of major cities in the older version of the template was much easier to navigate through. Listing the cities by population necessitates changing the template after changes in relative population, plus looks haphazard. Other state templates also use alphabetic listings (Template:Washington, Template:California, Template:California).

The deletion of the regions also was unnessessary; a better solution would be to write articles for the regions rather than just imply that the only region in Wisconsin was the Lake Superior Lowland.

The older template also was more compact, and fit better within an article. (Compare with other state templates, again.) If anything, Wisconsin's template should be made more compact, not larger.--BaronLarf 09:01, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

I took you suggestions into consideration and created a compact template for the admittedly much more rural state of West Virginia. I agree that alphabetically listing cities makes the section more navigable; however, I wanted to impose some sort of hierarchy of cities and to feature more isolated, smaller cities rather than suburbs of Milwaukee.

Note the compactness of the template, the alphabetical listing of cities, the highlighting of the state capital, and the efficient data organization.

As for the regions, I'd like to see some with articles already written becuase they tend to lend themselves more easily to articles, however, I haven't found any for Wisconsin.

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates lists and displays all 50 U.S. state (and additional other) templates. It potentially can be used for ideas and standardization. //MrD9 07:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]