User talk:Xoid

User space navigation

Pages: User page | Talk page || Archives: User page | Talk page || Templates: Layout | Navigation bar | User bars || Misc: To do list

Okay… I'll bite

I'm curious. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

It's a tale of two {{cite}}s :P

Check out most of the pages with {{cite}} on it. These are ones that are, for the most part, either imported by or written by Wikipedians. {{cite}} on BTW and {{cite}} on Wikipedia currently work very, very differently and are utterly incompatible. I'm replacing instances of the currently correct usage with {{citation needed}} because it's less work to import pages from Wikipedia than it is to import and have to change dozens of citations each time. --Xoid 19:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I got it: Hesperus II uses {{cite}} the same way we use <ref>. If I understand it, we'll start using {{citation needed}} needed instead of {{cite}}, and then allow imported WP pages to use {{cite}} the same way we use <refs>.--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe they used to use them "semi-interchangeably". Nowadays they actually use the two together, as seen in the pages we have that currently use it (pretty sure I fixed the few that had it used as {{cn}} so any page out of the rest should display correctly now). I still need to clear up the templates a touch, maybe trim out a lot of the crap in, import and refactor their documentation, etc., but that can wait until another day.

You can still use {{cn}} if you're lazy. Pretty sure there isn't a commonly used template with that name. --Xoid 22:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay. I just want to be sure your work is properly documented, so that people don't continue to use the wrong one unknowingly. I think I understand; I just need to view it from the perspective of a new Editor, to be sure.--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Kk, understood. :)

Only you used {{cite}} for its old purpose (as opposed to {{cn}} which is completely unaffected), so I don't think confusion between the two will be a problem. I will get around to properly documenting the current incarnation but not right now — there is too much that needs to be done to clean it up first and I'm not going to produce documentation if it'll become useless within the day. I'll get to work on cleaning it up "when I get around to it", probably some time this afternoon, documentation will follow shortly thereafter. --Xoid 23:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

No, I wasn't suggesting that you hadn't done so. I was speaking out loud about making sure there was no lingering traces to using the templates incorrectly. That's what I mean about approaching it as a new Editor (as a tasker to me). Just now I'm a little caught up in the drama regarding our troll. More on that privately. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Contact info is on my page if you need it. --Xoid 23:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Point of (probably unnecessary) clarification: I am working under the belief (and was previously referring to) that Help:CUT is properly indicating the use of the {{citation needed}} or {{cn}} templates. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

100% correct. --Xoid 08:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Secondary: would you please take a look at my draft of Policy:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence and see if those redlinked templates are suitably named for the same role they'd play here on BTW? If they are (and you tell me so), I'll build them here (and -of course- wait for you or Ebakunin to fix 'em). Thanks. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The various shortcut templates could be rather easily rolled into one template with a bit of ParserFunctions. The other templates seem alright the way that they're named. Feel free to import like crazy.

Rev, just promise we don't end up like this (possibly NSFW), please. No, seriously. Wikipedia is fast becoming a joke with the number of unnecessary {{cn}}s everywhere, and the complete ban on original research is applied to the obscure and obvious alike. A broad "sources" entry at the bottom should be sufficient for someone wanting to know where to read more about the topic in general. I want to know that {{cn}} (and the <ref>s that replace them) will be restricted to things that are either historical, highly suspect (e.g. "Clan Ghost Bear is a misnomer; their totem is actually David Hasselhoff.") or would seem so to someone familiar with BT but not the topic at hand (perhaps something like the Jihad to anyone versed well enough in the rest of BT lore, but deficient with ComStar?). Also fine on articles about things that are divisive amongst fans or various BT related legal debacles. --Xoid 08:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)