Talk:I-Mag
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Disclamer
This article is placed over Wikipedia under permission from I-Mag's editorial board
- --H i-c h-a M 08:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Restructuring
These are the justifications of the changes I made:
- Removed Copyright thing - not needed or different to any other free magazine
- See also simply pointed to this discussion page - not needed
- Removed the automatic placement of the Table of Contents
- Total restructure of headings, as there were w..a..y too many, most containing single sentences - I won't justify the removal of single headings
- Removed thing about intimacy as it really wasn't NPOV
- I wasn't certain, but I removed the line 'Moreover, it can be read on PDA or on some Mobile phones, which make it very easy to read any issue, no matter where or when.' as it applies to any PDF, and isn't really important
- Moved 'Its not affiliated ...' to top, and restructured as it sounded overly commercial
- Removed comment about it not being dogmatic regarding NPOV
- Removed 'in all areas they cover while adhering to the code of ethics of journalism.' regarding NPOV
- Removed some of the imformation on the slogan, as it began to ramble
- Rearranged a bit of the text into a new 'History' section
- Removed information on style guides, as it isn't relevant to the reader
- Removed 'free of partiallity' due to NPOV
Most of the rest of the changes have been just moving stuff around to better 'wikify' it
I'm not going to remove the 'to be cleaned up' tag yet, as I'm still not happy with it and don't quite know how to get rid of the 'sales job' feel - plus some confirmation of my changes would be appreciated or suggestions. I know nothing of the magazine, and some of my edits may be inaccurate. In all - I'm sorry I had to cut so much out, and add so little - but I think it needed to be done. Lochok 10:42, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] comments on restructuring
- The page looks much better after this restructuring, as much as to make it more "wikified" and in the appropriate "NPOV" format. However I just want to comment on the following point:
- "History": This new section is o.k., however I wonder if we can separate listing of the issues under a sub-section called "Time-Line" as it was before; as listing an issue is more close to be under a timeline than history, and in the same time it is a part of history. What do you think?
- Notes: I modified the 1st section in this discussion by removing the template Time; as it has no meaning to be placed there.
- --H i-c h-a M 22:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- I almost deleted the list as well - is it really necessary to have when each issue is published considering there is that there is a description of how often it used to be published, how often it is now published and that there was a brief hiatus. I'm not sure how much a timeline section is actually needed - in fact that list as well simply because its repeating informatio non it. That said, I have not a clue on the said subject and just restructured it due to the request Lochok 10:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
I've killed the Cleanup tag - it's looking fairly good now - esp. after that Bot went through it. I don't think it needs any more cleaning. Like - its still not perfect but that will come with time if readers view the page Lochok 22:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
