Should this page be named "Coker in Alabama, USA"? In the same way that I have created pages called "Norfolk, England", Norwich, Norfolk, England" etc etc so that people can tell which Alabama they are dealing with i.e. I may visit this page think it is about a Coker family living in the Genesee County of New York in USA.

What happens when I start to write about family, Eldredge in Sharon?

Personally I think all locations should follow a four part category with any specific place forming a fifth if ness. The only time when this will not apply is when the subject covers that whole area i.e.

USA, New York, Onondaga, Syracuse
England, Counties of England
England, Famous English People
England, Norfolk, Norwich, Churches of Norwich
England, Norfolk, History of Norfolk, England

etc etc

I (an ignorant insular Kiwi, maybe) didn't know there was another "Alabama". Now I see that there is; even smaller than Plimmerton. But Wikipedia uses just "Alabama" for the far better known one. Any NY Coker relatives can either use that page and explain, or create their own more specifically-named page. "Sharon" is not as clear-cut: at least 13 of them; best to specify which of those you mean.
Your 4-part system could give us "London, England, United Kingdom, Europe", maybe - overkill in my opinion. We can afford to keep things fairly simple because it is easy to rename a page. And I follow Wikipedia's article and category names as far as possible, because of huge timesaving, though I have tended to add a country name to some UK ones, especially smallish towns, such as Wigtown, Scotland, despite their uniqueness.
(Incidentally, if you ever get tired of typing "br" in brackets you can start lines with colons. Less typing and better futureproofing; I've read that "br" may be incompatible with advances in MediaWiki software!)
Thanks for becoming a lively alert contributor and for helping your friend Beth. Robin Patterson 15:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)