Talk:HitRecord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Companies (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Use of lead as template (for inclusion into summary style section of principal) Comment[edit]

@Lady Lotus: You reverted an "invisible" change to this article. Please explain your objection, and how you think it would be better handled. Reversions should always have an explanation either in the change summary, or in the talk page.

Some background:

The Joseph Gordon-Levitt article has a section for hitRECord. That section is done summary-style, with a {{Main}} reference referring to this article. Other than that, the section is empty. Usually, summary-style sections should include a brief description of the subject.

The lead section of the HitRecord article is a very good summary that would fulfill that need well. It could just be copied, but then it would have to be resynchronized regularly. Another way to handle it is to actually have the lead text transcluded (as if it was a template) into the JGL article. However, to do that, the HitRecord article needs some very small technical changes, invisible when reading the HitRecord article, to tell the server to include the lead section and nothing else. This is a normal use in Wikipedia, and can be found in other articles.

You removed the markup tags, without giving a reason, and did not update the JGL article, so it still transcluded this article into the section. Without the markup limiting the inclusion, it caused the entire HitRecord article to be included into JGL#hitRECord, which broke the JGL article. A day later, another editor "fixed" this by removing the transclusion, so the section is back to being empty. -Dovid (talk) 14:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry! I'll be honest, I've never seen that used before so I had no idea what I did but now I do, carry on! :) Lady Lotus (talk) 14:50, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Propose category[edit]

That is seven articles about HitRecord. 24.211.179.19 (talk) 14:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Problems with recent article edits[edit]

A stream of edits was done to this article. I'm particularly concerned with a few paragraphs in the lede which are unsourced, confusing, and interrupt the flow of the lede. Some of the material is of low importance to the article, and does belong in the lede at all, even if it does meet standards.

Here are the sentences containing the edits:

HitRecord is ranked at #100,000 in Alexa Internet's top 100,000 web sites and has been part of Amazon Web Services since the summer of 2011.[2][3] Its forums are powered by phpBB and its videos byFlowplayer. Go Daddy is due to shut it down on June 20, 2015, six months before Nickelodeon's web site domain shuts down. They started becoming more active in 2007 after the release of The Lookout and their sign-up for YouTube in 2006.

  1. The first sentence (re: Alexa top 100k list) is mostly original and relevant, but was outdated. The edit to place it as the last entry of the list is unsourced - probably WP:RS because it was pulled directly from Alexa. IT has now fallen off the 100k chart, so the edit should be removed, and replaced with some language saying it was in the top 100k from ___ to ___. The end of the sentence, about use of AWS, is probably not lede material.


  1. The second sentence (phpBB, Flowayplayer) is also unsourced, and consists of trivialities. It should be removed. If sourced, it should move further down in the article.
  2. The third sentence (shutdown) breaks the flow, as it moves forward to 2015 before the next sentence brings us back to 2006 and 2007. Further, it is unsourced and if true would be key information, which makes its sourcing more important. It is also confusingly worded - are the two halves of the sentence related, and if so how? Is there some background fact tying them together? I suspect this is just ifnormation about the date they renew, since I can't find any info about Nickeloedon shutting down (likely to make news) nor HitRecord.

Because of this series of issues, I would like to revert the questionable series of edits. If they can be improved, then certainly they can be restored. Dovid (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2015 (UTC)