Wikipedia talk:Updating information
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Historical discussions related to the initial implementation of template:update after are at Wikipedia talk:As of. The "update after" mechanism is intended to largely replace the Wikipedia:As of mechanism. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Comments here
This is brilliant! It would probably work best for elections etc in minor locations. For something that's well-known like a US predidential election, the information would be updated anyway and the template would just get in the way and confuse things.
I like the idea of allowing a category to be specified when the page needs updating. Perhaps a default category could be used if a category is not specified? Tra (Talk) 16:44, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- There is an optional category (categorization only happens after the indicated date), but no default category. Given the "what links here" technique for finding all "update needed" articles (per day, month, or year), is a default category really necessary? -- Rick Block (talk) 16:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- "What links here" would show you all of the pages using this template, including those that don't need updating. A default category would allow you to see just those pages that need updating, which is useful for allowing people to browse through that category and update anything listed there. Tra (Talk) 19:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- The template adds a reference to a non-existent page for the given year-month-day, another non-existent page for the given year-month, and another non-existent page for the given year. Using what links here to the appropriate (non-existent) article, you can find pages needing updating today, tomorrow, this month, last month, this year, etc. (the links on Wikipedia:Updating information work like this). This is all in addition to the possibility of adding a category, and the article is only added to the category after the indicated date. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Note that the non-existent pages mentioned above do not need to exist, and in fact SHOULD not exist, since the system would then need maintenance; Rick had a FANTASTIC idea when he proposed that change; it makes the entire system very elegant. Using a category is optional, and is intended for use by editors working on articles which are part of a series, for instance when a physicist editor wants to be reminded when a physics article needs updating; s/he would simply look at the appropriate category page (the name of which would be agreed upon by the consensus of the editors working on physics articles) to see if there's any articles listed. Having a default category would basically be redundant, since Wikipedia:Updating information already has links to the articles which are in need of updating. --Scott McNay 06:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- The template adds a reference to a non-existent page for the given year-month-day, another non-existent page for the given year-month, and another non-existent page for the given year. Using what links here to the appropriate (non-existent) article, you can find pages needing updating today, tomorrow, this month, last month, this year, etc. (the links on Wikipedia:Updating information work like this). This is all in addition to the possibility of adding a category, and the article is only added to the category after the indicated date. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- "What links here" would show you all of the pages using this template, including those that don't need updating. A default category would allow you to see just those pages that need updating, which is useful for allowing people to browse through that category and update anything listed there. Tra (Talk) 19:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Random drive-by editor comment: this looks great. Thank you for taking the time to code it. I'll just start using it on some low-profile articles and see what happens. Sandstein 13:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Use the bot signal!
I think this could benefit from a bot to populate the list. Other than that, sounds useful. >Radiant< 20:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Bot to populate what list? The intent is "no maintenance required" (see above). -- Rick Block (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree; unless there's a serious flaw with the way that the system works, there's no need for anyone to do anything except update the indicated articles, and then either remove the template from the artcle (if it is obsolete) or adjust the template parameters (for a new date when it WILL need updating). Rick and I had an intermediate version which would have needed the list to be populated, but the current version *should* not need this, unless our understanding of the mechanics of WikiMedia are incorrect.
- P.S. I like the colorful sig --Scott McNay 06:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Future updates
In case anyone is wondering how many articles are needing update in the future, take a look:
2007
2008 *
2009 *
2010 *
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
[edit] Use of template in section headers
Upon looking at User:Sandstein's edit to his article, I realized that the template cannot be used anywhere on the same line as a section header, since it either makes the header not be recognized, or changes the header when the time comes. This is not good, since it is possible to link to headers, meaning that if someone clicks on such a link, it will fail. I'm updating the usage instructions appropriately. --Scott McNay 06:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Update to Template:Update_after
I've made changes to Template:Update after (it now links to Category:Wikipedia articles in need of updating and As of), and made significant changes to the documentation at Template:Update_after (including documenting the built-in ability to add a comment, and a changes in where it's allowable to be used); please review, and provide comments at Template talk:Update after if you think any are appropriate. Thanks! --Scott McNay 04:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
