Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,198
edits
Forum:Cite source, a new citation template: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:Cite source, a new citation template (view source)
Revision as of 00:12, 23 July 2023
, 23 July 2023no edit summary
Bongolium500 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary Tags: thread closure 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive}}[[Category:Panopticon archives]] | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
== Opening post == | == Opening post == | ||
| Line 197: | Line 197: | ||
::::::: Good. While caching is a little annoying at the moment, it will lead to performance benefits down the line. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:56, 12 July 2023 (UTC) | ::::::: Good. While caching is a little annoying at the moment, it will lead to performance benefits down the line. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:56, 12 July 2023 (UTC) | ||
== Conclusion == | |||
<div class="tech"> | |||
Well, this thread has passed the 30-day mark calling for review for a little while — and despite the weightiness of the decision involved, I feel secure in '''closing it in favour of widespread implementation of {{tlx|cite source}}'''. | |||
This template is simply fantastic, a small marvel of Wiki-engineering combining technical inventiveness with filling a real need regarding how we display the actual ''content'' of the Wiki. It finally allows the dream of the old series prefixes — crisp, precise citation — to be realised without forcing our readership to memorise high numbers of obscure acronyms. | |||
There is scarcely anything left here for me to settle, as opposed to simply rubber-stamp. This proposal's history is not just a litany of blind support, but a long sequence of various people — from [[User:CzechOut]] to casual, not-we users — reporting concerns or technical issues, and [[User:Bongolium500]] unfailingly engaging with and resolving those issues. Every major issue from mobile compatibility to accessibility to even [[Special:WhatLinksHere]] has been considered — to say nothing of the wonderful {{tlx|store variant data}}, which not only allows us to deal with multiple editions of books and the like, but finally gives us a robust way to cite special editions and animated recons without having to award them separate source-pages. Perhaps other mild technical challenges will arise, but if so, I am confident that smaller-scale threads, or [[Template talk:Cite source]], will be sufficient to resolve them swiftly. Frankly, the current draft of the template is more effective and has clearer guidelines for implementation than many templates that ''currently'' exist in the main namespace. | |||
An understandable question which has been raised in this thread: will there be standards? What should be the "default" way to cite a given story be? I imagine a ''de facto'' default will be set if Bongolium makes good on his idea of massive bot runs implementing a "basic" version of the template to solo citations of a given story, which, though it won't do ''everything'' for us, will still do a lot. But beyond this, I don't think this is a worrisome question. Editors ''should'' be free to adopt the sourcing which seems most appropriate to a given statement; we are not robots! Just because we strive to be neutral and objective, does not mean we must aspire to turn into lifeless robots! It is already the case that you can cite ‘([[TV]]: ''[[An Unearthly Child (TV story)|An Unearthly Child]]'')’ or ‘([[TV]]: "[[The Cave of Skulls]]")’ depending on what seems most legible and informative in a specific context — or indeed what information you possess at the moment. | |||
This brings me to another important point: while ultimately we should strive to use {{tlx|cite source}} as widely as possible, '''this does not mean "legacy" citations are banned'''. Perhaps someday the kinks will all be ironed out for good, and we'll revisit this. But until then, when in doubt, there is e.g. nothing wrong with sticking with "([[PROSE]]: ''[[Dead Romance (novel)|Dead Romance]]'')". | |||
And now, go forth and cite! As always, thanks to everyone who participated — including the many people who chimed in with bug reports or constructive criticisms, and, of course, [[User:Bongolium500]] himself, without whose tireless work this great step forward for the Wiki would not have been possible. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 00:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
</div> | |||
