765,429
edits
Forum:DWM issues: please help (re)write leads: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:DWM issues: please help (re)write leads (edit)
Revision as of 03:23, 28 August 2012
, 28 August 2012Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff
Mini-mitch (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
So please, if you can, drop by the DWM issues category and help out! Thanks :) | So please, if you can, drop by the DWM issues category and help out! Thanks :) | ||
{{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}16:22: Thu 29 Mar 2012 </span> | ||
:Can the Bot do a mass wipe of the intro for all DWMs? of does it need to be done by hand? If by hand, we can start by getting rid of both date and month and leaving the year, and then we can work on trying to get the date. I think having the publication date is a really good thing to lead with for DWM. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 21:43, April 6, 2012 (UTC) | :Can the Bot do a mass wipe of the intro for all DWMs? of does it need to be done by hand? If by hand, we can start by getting rid of both date and month and leaving the year, and then we can work on trying to get the date. I think having the publication date is a really good thing to lead with for DWM. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 21:43, April 6, 2012 (UTC) | ||
::Could it do a mass ''wipe'' of the intro? Sure. But the point of the exercise isn't to wipe it. It's to ''change'' it. I think you're not quite understanding what needs to be done. All we have to do is to change the wording slightly. The information is actually on the page, conveniently to hand in the infobox. Whatcha do is take the cover date from the infobox and work it into a lead sentence like the ones given upthread. There's no need to "start by getting rid of both the date and month", "leaving the year", and then "work on" trying to get the date. The date's on the page already, just not in the lead. No research is called for. | ::Could it do a mass ''wipe'' of the intro? Sure. But the point of the exercise isn't to wipe it. It's to ''change'' it. I think you're not quite understanding what needs to be done. All we have to do is to change the wording slightly. The information is actually on the page, conveniently to hand in the infobox. Whatcha do is take the cover date from the infobox and work it into a lead sentence like the ones given upthread. There's no need to "start by getting rid of both the date and month", "leaving the year", and then "work on" trying to get the date. The date's on the page already, just not in the lead. No research is called for. | ||
::However, that said, the leads should be bigger than just, "Hey, this is what it says on the cover about the date." So a part of the virtue of doing this by hand is that we might actually be able to beef up the leads. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | ::However, that said, the leads should be bigger than just, "Hey, this is what it says on the cover about the date." So a part of the virtue of doing this by hand is that we might actually be able to beef up the leads. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}05:14: Sun 08 Apr 2012 </span> | ||
:: Wait, is it really on newsstands the day after last month's cover date? Because I'm looking at [[DWM 419]], (cover date 1 April) where it's previewing the month of April's TV episodes and [[DWM 420]] (cover date April 29), which has reviewed April airings ''The Eleventh Hour'' and ''The Beast Below'' and mentions TEH's viewing figures. Or are the cover dates themselves false? -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 01:06, May 6, 2012 (UTC) | :: Wait, is it really on newsstands the day after last month's cover date? Because I'm looking at [[DWM 419]], (cover date 1 April) where it's previewing the month of April's TV episodes and [[DWM 420]] (cover date April 29), which has reviewed April airings ''The Eleventh Hour'' and ''The Beast Below'' and mentions TEH's viewing figures. Or are the cover dates themselves false? -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 01:06, May 6, 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::Yes, it really is. You're confused because you've got your facts wrong on just about every count. Cover date of 419 is 31 March; of 420 it's 28 April. (If our site is agreeing with you, then we have an even bigger problem with DWM pages.) And your description of the contents is ''way'' off. 419 has very little series 5 coverage at all. What you're characterising as a series 5 "preview" is actually an interview with the non-Moffat exec producers. And 420 ''previews'' TEH through F&S. It doesn't ''review'' anything (other than CD stuff). So actually 419 and 420 prove that the cover date is the "last day valid". If it were the first day of release, then it would make no sense to be ''previewing'' TEH, because TEH had already premiered by 28 April. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | :::Yes, it really is. You're confused because you've got your facts wrong on just about every count. Cover date of 419 is 31 March; of 420 it's 28 April. (If our site is agreeing with you, then we have an even bigger problem with DWM pages.) And your description of the contents is ''way'' off. 419 has very little series 5 coverage at all. What you're characterising as a series 5 "preview" is actually an interview with the non-Moffat exec producers. And 420 ''previews'' TEH through F&S. It doesn't ''review'' anything (other than CD stuff). So actually 419 and 420 prove that the cover date is the "last day valid". If it were the first day of release, then it would make no sense to be ''previewing'' TEH, because TEH had already premiered by 28 April. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}23:02: Sun 06 May 2012 </span> | ||
::::Oh, lord, I just went to [[DWM 419]] and its saying that the cover date is [[4 March]], which is ''wholly'' wrong. It says 31 March 2010 clear as day on the cover. Okay, at this point, ''nothing'' about our DWM dates should be regarded as true. We need to absolutely verify '''by looking at each and every cover''' each and every date. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | ::::Oh, lord, I just went to [[DWM 419]] and its saying that the cover date is [[4 March]], which is ''wholly'' wrong. It says 31 March 2010 clear as day on the cover. Okay, at this point, ''nothing'' about our DWM dates should be regarded as true. We need to absolutely verify '''by looking at each and every cover''' each and every date. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}23:05: Sun 06 May 2012 </span> | ||
:::: Incidentally, I've been overwriting pages with the second solution with that of the first. The first type felt a lot clearer to me. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 21:28, May 9, 2012 (UTC) | :::: Incidentally, I've been overwriting pages with the second solution with that of the first. The first type felt a lot clearer to me. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 21:28, May 9, 2012 (UTC) | ||
