Template talk:Cite web: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Paul Derry
No edit summary
imported>Derek Harkness
 
Line 30: Line 30:
   | doi =
   | doi =
   | accessdate =  May 6, 2007}}
   | accessdate =  May 6, 2007}}
[[User:Derek Harkness|Derek Harkness]] 01:32, 6 May 2007 (CDT)


Having all those dates linked always bothered me... Ok yeah, you can browse by day or by year, but that's the only use that I can see, or am I short sighted? I mean, I suppose each year could be a category with a brief overview of the world at large on it, but that would require a good deal of work. Or at least a very, very clever summarizing bot...
Having all those dates linked always bothered me... Ok yeah, you can browse by day or by year, but that's the only use that I can see, or am I short sighted? I mean, I suppose each year could be a category with a brief overview of the world at large on it, but that would require a good deal of work. Or at least a very, very clever summarizing bot...

Latest revision as of 01:32, 6 May 2007

Needless linking of dates

The current template links the access date. Given that the access date isn't really a significant event in history, I see no reason for all the links. Is anyone really going to follow them? I have made a new template at {{cite web2}} that does not link the date. I suggest, after testing, that we replace this template with the new one.

To compair the difference. Here's the current template:

And here's the suggested new template

Derek Harkness 01:32, 6 May 2007 (CDT)

Having all those dates linked always bothered me... Ok yeah, you can browse by day or by year, but that's the only use that I can see, or am I short sighted? I mean, I suppose each year could be a category with a brief overview of the world at large on it, but that would require a good deal of work. Or at least a very, very clever summarizing bot...

Cheers, -Paul Derry 01:11, 6 May 2007 (CDT)