Geeklog Forums

Thanks for the offer... I decided not to do that since the internal wiki links would not be valid, etc.

I played with the article in a sandbox for the last few weeks, I think it will pass the previous concerns that caused the article to be deleted.

Article is live as of the time of this post...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geeklog

No need to repeat the link. Anyway, please avoid deletion by respecting the cite web template. This means using the publisher parameter (usually domain.com without www, e.g. publisher=domian.com) and using consensual en wiki dates (yyyy-mm-dd). I also think not even one reference has a date (as opposed to accessdate). Are they really all unknown? Thanks for all the work.

Trying to learn how to write the citations and the wiki template syntax was the hardest part... I looked at a lot of other articles to see examples and possibly learned some bad habits and poor style from them.

I completely missed the need for "publisher = domain" so that will be an easy addition.

Also thank you for the feedback on the dates... somewhere I learned that the preferred date format was "dd Month yyyy" but if not the article citations can easily be revised.

Ah.. now I know where I learned "dd Month year"... it's the MLA citation style for dates.

I beg of you not to quote an entire post, especially if you're the immediate follower.

Also note the weird spaces when closing a template - {{template }}.

Hello anonymous,

Could you please post pointers to the Wikipedia help pages covering the changes you suggested?

The Citation templates page show examples using the MLA style for dates mentioned above:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_templates

Thanks very much.

I was talking directly about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite web - I see now it suggets using all three date options. Sorry for thinking otherwise. I guess I'm just used to seeing yyyy-mm-dd in en articles.

All nitpicking aside: A big Thank You to Dan for writing this article and getting it into Wikipedia.

To "Guest": It seems you put that citation style warning into the article? Now that Dan seems to have addressed the concerns, would you consider taking it out again?

bye, Dirk

Thanks Dan,

We appreciate the work you did!

---

One of the Geeklog Core Developers.

I promise to personally undo the warning as soon as publisher= is used.

Glad to do it.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web

There are only two required parameters for cite_web : title and url.

"publisher" is an optional parameter. In fact, using the domain name for "publisher" goes against the recommendations and examples.

If we were citing nytimes.com, publisher would be "New York Times" not nytimes.com.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web#Examples for additional examples that illustrate this.


I am guessing that the general Geeklog community is not interested in the minutia of Wikipedia citation style. I have created a Talk page for the Geeklog article, it seems appropriate to suggest that those interested in the details of the article should continue discussion at wikipedia.org.

Only Title and URL are mandatory but things like publisher, date and accessdate are pretty basic (as opposed to dozens of exotic parameters). If the publisher has its own article, of course you're supposed to use it instead of its domain.

I Updated latest release date and version on Wikipedia.org, but the References section need some cleaning...


Ben

---

I'm available to customise your themes or plugins for your Geeklog CMS