Welcome to Geeklog Sunday, October 22 2017 @ 11:16 am EDT


Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Quote by: Dirk

Thanks a lot for your efforts, Dan.

If you think it would help, you could also put your draft on the Geeklog Wiki, e.g. for collaboration or public review.

bye, Dirk



Thanks for the offer... I decided not to do that since the internal wiki links would not be valid, etc.

I played with the article in a sandbox for the last few weeks, I think it will pass the previous concerns that caused the article to be deleted.


Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Article is live as of the time of this post...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geeklog

Guest

Anonymous
No need to repeat the link. Anyway, please avoid deletion by respecting the cite web template. This means using the publisher parameter (usually domain.com without www, e.g. publisher=domian.com) and using consensual en wiki dates (yyyy-mm-dd). I also think not even one reference has a date (as opposed to accessdate). Are they really all unknown? Thanks for all the work.

Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Quote by: Guest

No need to repeat the link. Anyway, please avoid deletion by respecting the cite web template. This means using the publisher parameter (usually domain.com without www, e.g. publisher=domian.com) and using consensual en wiki dates (yyyy-mm-dd). I also think not even one reference has a date (as opposed to accessdate). Are they really all unknown? Thanks for all the work.



Trying to learn how to write the citations and the wiki template syntax was the hardest part... I looked at a lot of other articles to see examples and possibly learned some bad habits and poor style from them.

I completely missed the need for "publisher = domain" so that will be an easy addition.

Also thank you for the feedback on the dates... somewhere I learned that the preferred date format was "dd Month yyyy" but if not the article citations can easily be revised.

Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Ah.. now I know where I learned "dd Month year"... it's the MLA citation style for dates.

Guest

Anonymous
I beg of you not to quote an entire post, especially if you're the immediate follower. Big Grin

Also note the weird spaces when closing a template - {{template }}.

Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Hello anonymous,

Could you please post pointers to the Wikipedia help pages covering the changes you suggested?

The Citation templates page show examples using the MLA style for dates mentioned above:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_templates

Thanks very much.

Guest

Anonymous
I was talking directly about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite web - I see now it suggets using all three date options. Sorry for thinking otherwise. I guess I'm just used to seeing yyyy-mm-dd in en articles.

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
All nitpicking aside: A big Thank You to Dan for writing this article and getting it into Wikipedia.

To "Guest": It seems you put that citation style warning into the article? Now that Dan seems to have addressed the concerns, would you consider taking it out again?

bye, Dirk

Status: offline

Laugh

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 27/09/2005
Posts: 1232
Thanks Dan,

We appreciate the work you did!
One of the Geeklog Core Developers.

Guest

Anonymous
I promise to personally undo the warning as soon as publisher= is used.

Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Quote by: Dirk A big Thank You to Dan for writing this article and getting it into Wikipedia.


Glad to do it.

Status: offline

Dan Stoner

Forum User
Chatty
Registered: 28/01/2009
Posts: 43
Location:Gainesville, FL
Quote by: Guest

I promise to personally undo the warning as soon as publisher= is used.



See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web

There are only two required parameters for cite_web : title and url.

"publisher" is an optional parameter. In fact, using the domain name for "publisher" goes against the recommendations and examples.

If we were citing nytimes.com, publisher would be "New York Times" not nytimes.com.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web#Examples for additional examples that illustrate this.


I am guessing that the general Geeklog community is not interested in the minutia of Wikipedia citation style. I have created a Talk page for the Geeklog article, it seems appropriate to suggest that those interested in the details of the article should continue discussion at wikipedia.org.

Guest

Anonymous
Only Title and URL are mandatory but things like publisher, date and accessdate are pretty basic (as opposed to dozens of exotic parameters). If the publisher has its own article, of course you're supposed to use it instead of its domain.

Status: offline

::Ben

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 14/01/2005
Posts: 1569
Location:la rochelle, France
I Updated latest release date and version on Wikipedia.org, but the References section need some cleaning...
This section's citation style may be unclear. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking.


Ben
I'm available to customise your themes or plugins for your Geeklog CMS

All times are EDT. The time is now 11:16 am.

  • Normal Topic
  • Sticky Topic
  • Locked Topic
  • New Post
  • Sticky Topic W/ New Post
  • Locked Topic W/ New Post
  •  View Anonymous Posts
  •  Able to post
  •  Filtered HTML Allowed
  •  Censored Content