[WikiEN-l] A newbie on article prefill templating

Wed Dec 21 11:32:28 UTC 2005

On 12/21/05, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>
> >On 12/21/05, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>That's why to start simple, to see if we need to. Something
> >>>to help the newbies and not annoy the experienced editors.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Speaking as a semi-experienced editor, I wouldn't mind the odd template.
> >>Typing is boring. Let the machine do it.
> >>
> >>Incidentally, there was a proposal somewhere to change the nomenclature
> >>from "references" and "external links"  to "sources" and "further
> >>reading".  I've seen this implemented once or twice and it seems to work
> >>a lot better, and remove all the confusion over when to use URLs, swaps
> >>academic naming conventions ("references") for more understood
> >>"sources", etc.  If a template is being created, it's probably a good
> >>opportunity to think about making a decision on that, and implementing
> >>it there.
> >>
> >>Steve
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >I'm not really happy about "Further reading". Not only do some
> >external links show films, or images (which don't require reading), it
> >also fails to take into account that further reading is much thought
> >about with regard to print sources and may lead to people being
> >confused on where to put external links.
> >
> >And that's without mentioning the 800,000 articles that'd need changing.
> >
> >Mgm
> >
> >
> Ditto Mgm. I'm not worried about the 800k articles we'd have to change -
> we got through categorising fine, didn't we? What I'm concerned about is
> that, as he said, external links != further reading. Maybe we could
> change "further reading" to "other resources"?
>
> John Lee
> ([[User:Johnleemk]])

Why not keep "External links" and add "Further reading" to separate
print and online publications.