I'm not sure that this really answers the question Phil. I can't see that variations in location boxes has any bearing on testing and security and in most cases, searches can be done to take into account a range of probable answers. I have only one example of Devonshire being amended (and incidentally, the same applies to Dorset and Somerset) but if a search was being undertaken surely it would throw up all those listed with 'shire' on the end wouldn't it?
A couple more examples. Historically in England and Wales if the county name was simply the county town with 'shire' on the end it was not necessary to write e.g. Northampton, Northamptonshire, England in fact Northampton, England would be sufficient but again I have been told this causes problems with searches. But why not just search for 'Northampton'?
Finally before I finish my little rant, one more which made me think. My 3x G grandmother was born in Stockland, then an exclave of Dorset (I dare not say Dorsetshire...)within Devon barely more than a mile square. These anomalies were largely swept away by the Counties (Detached Parts) Act of 1844. To be helpful I listed it as Dorset (now Devon) but of course this also fell foul of the rules, although just listing one county could involve genealogists in unnecessary research if they weren't aware of the situation.
The stock answer is to put it in the bio but in a full bio this could very easily be missed.
Anyway, that's me done. I love Wikitree really, I just wish...