Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-09-06/Dispatches

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discuss this story

This page has been blanked for ease of comment. ResMar 23:25, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is also "Cite for Wiki", a downloadable addition which creates a "quick and dirty" tool for adding initial sources from web pages which are susceptible to later refinement by bots and others. I've found it useful in dealing with unsourced, but credible, edits, as long as they are reliably sourced on the web. Rodhullandemu 23:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these, like Reflinks and DYKcheck, would work better as bots, wouldn't they? Ginger Conspiracy (talk) 07:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ginger, at least on Reflinks, and it sounds like the same on DYKcheck, you sometimes need a human to review before edits are saved. Using Reflinks, the tool extracts infomation from websites used as sources for an article and one problem is that sometimes the info is incorrectly labelled e.g. reflinks, on the plain links setting, can suggest within a cite template: author=11 June 2010 by Joseph Pulitzer|date=11 June 2010... i.e. a human needs to look at this and see that the date has been duplicated. Having said this, Reflinks was used automatically in the past see [1] Tom B (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, thanks for this article! I found it the most useful Signpost article I've read in a long time. Many of these features should really be included as standard, but since they aren't, people need to know about them. (I expect most users aren't even aware of all the possibilities available under User Preferences.) Robofish (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a wonderfully useful report, thank you for writing it.--Eloquence* 04:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I wonder whether it's possible to save it as a WP page, after the next and final installment. Tony (talk) 07:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A good addition to Signpost. I think it's a shame that probably people who read Signpost are going to be towards the end of the spectrum that are aware of useful tools already. Still, it should inspire a few readers. --bodnotbod (talk) 10:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'de be suprised... ResMar 23:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is good article. "Demo" link is especially nice. --Was a bee (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-09-06/Dispatches&oldid=1077437172"