Template talk:Adelaide newspapers

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

Sources[edit]

JabberJaw (talk) 08:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use of definite articles[edit]

@Paine Ellsworth: Hello and thank you for your efforts to improve this template! Actually, I would like to let you know that, as per the conversation starting here, I have deliberately chosen to avoid the inclusion of leading articles in the list. As it stands ATM, the list is simple and consistent throughout in its non-use, as distinct from individual pages where that is not necessarily the case. Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 02:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome, Jabberjaw, as I love to improve templates! One thing for you to consider... sometimes readers become confused when they see one name in one place, and then another similar name but lacking a word or two in another place. An example would be for them to see The Register in the lead of an article, and then for them to see Register in an associated template (actually confused me at first for a moment). So it might be better for us as editors to keep to the exact names that the various periodicals were called, don't you think?  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  03:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And if, as is often the case, the name is different in various reliable sources, then we must choose one name over the other as the COMMONNAME, as has been done in the article's lead ("The Register" over "Register"). Once editors choose a name to use, then it's important to stay consistent throughout.  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  15:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again and thank you for your replies. Regarding your first comment, confusion of names on Wikipedia, yes naming and redirects are indeed complex issues here, but I would argue that regular users of Wikipedia are used to these (as per examples such as searching for UK or Burma). Other closer examples could include InDaily or South Australian Gazette and Colonial Register. But users here also learn to broaden their thinking I would say, to learn of similarities and variants and connections in topics too. Further, this template is usually only accessed once already on a newspaper page, so I would say users of newspaper articles and templates are quite familiar with such newspaper name variations too.
Common name is indeed a slippery slope (you could refer to the Burma/Myanmar talk page history of for details of how excited that topic can be). I am glad you raise this point, since The Register (i.e. South Australian Register) was recently the focus of a move request (unsuccessful due to lack of discussion), reflecting complexities in how articles should be named vs how they are named vs how each name is perceived. Re. names, use of Register/The Register is also unclear, given:
So the solution (as per other discussion page cited) is to keep the template simple, consistent in itself, but links accurate, as is already the case here, particularly given that it is highly likely that I will add scores more lesser known newspapers to it (see Template:South Australia newspapers for an example of template bloat - and there are at least 50-70 more that can/should be added to that one too). I liked your idea of making sections visible, so that may be one way to help make the load easier. Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong, I sometimes am, but I don't see this as a problem in need of a solution. This can't be the first time editors have thought to discuss this, and most of the templates I've seen stick to the convention of being consistent, that is, consistently using the same names as article titles and usages within articles. Template bloat has been resolved by only allowing the most important and notable representatives of the navbar subject into the navbar. If you see this as a problem that needs a solution, then we may need to involve other editors to help settle it. For my part, I can see no reason to sacrifice clarity and consistency just to save a little space. I agree that it's best to keep things simple – but not too simple. Best of everything to you and yours!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  16:34, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Yes - I guess we can agree to disagree on simplicity. Once again, the main driver for simplification (before spacing became an issue here) was the inconsistent use of articles when it comes to newspapers. I have spent the last few months examining in detail each and every one of the links on these template pages (probably around 250+ in total), and the only consistency is inconsistency (hence my desire to make these templates consistent). So perhaps, for the next step, it might be good for us to connect this to WP policy, which tends to clarify. Thanks again. JabberJaw (talk) 02:32, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Better way to do this?[edit]

This template is hard to follow and unintuitive. It lists the Observer in two time periods but not one in the middle. Arranging by time period might not be the best way to do this. Any ideas for improvements? Donama (talk) 00:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Adelaide_newspapers&oldid=1198006708"