User talk:Hellknowz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:H3llkn0wz)
Jump to: navigation, search

   Have a my BOT-related message? Please post on the H3llBot's talk page or Article alerts discussion page. Thank you!

Question[edit]

Hi, about two years ago you posted a comment here. I was wondering if you could enlighten me. I recently wrote a template {{Books and Writers}} which is for a dead site accessible only through the Wayback Machine. The template produces output like this:

Petri Liukkonen. "Arthur Schopenhauer". Books and Writers (kirjasto.sci.fi). Archived from the original on 4 July 2013.


Is this OK or am I doing it wrong? Doing it as a template made the job of replacing existing instances much easier as I could just swap in the new template replacing the previous text. Plus it creates a consistent look and easy to update URLs in the future in a single place. -- GreenC 18:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey. I think WP:CITET is the most relevant here. Personally, I would avoid new templates. I'm not 100% sure what the guidelines on new templates are at the moment. I'm pretty sure you'd need some sort of consensus first. There is a lot of work done to standardize the templates, their internal workings, and the code they produce. But despite that, different styles are still allowed, so your template would only fit one of them and only in a basic form. This is probably a better question at WT:CITE. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, it's also for external links sections like {{Wayback}}. We have lots of site-specific external link templates. As a citation template I don't know you may be right it's better to stick with existing cite templates. Just makes maintenance of links much harder, as Books and Writers might return from the dead, or change how the information is displayed, or keep track of which articles use it via Special WhatLinksHere. -- GreenC 20:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, the site-specific templates are in external links, usually because they can be identified by some ID and the template can build the full address. I think that's fine. But using that as inline citation/reference, I am not sure. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. I've AWB'd the set and changed all the inline cites to {{cite web}}, for example. Thanks for your input. -- GreenC 16:29, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at my BRFA[edit]

There are 2 comments waiting for you. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 19:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

And more comments. :p—cyberpowerChat:Online 20:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Again. :p—cyberpowerChat:Online 22:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid my time is very limited, so I won't be able to follow the BRFA in detail. I only posted a few immediate thoughts. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 22:53, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, regardless, thanks for your input. Do you think I should re-apply for BAG to help contribute? It seems BAG could use another volunteer. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 22:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)