Template talk:Introductory article
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Documentation
This template should be used on articles that serve as general introductions to some technical topic, also known as trampoline articles. It takes one input variable, the title of the main encyclopaedia article. For example,
{{introduction|Quantum mechanics}} produces This article is intended as a general non-technical introduction. For the main encyclopedia article, please see Quantum mechanics.
[edit] Proposed change to text
I think it would be better to say "the full encyclopaedia article" rather than "the proper encyclopaedia article". The introductory article is surely entirely proper! It should be just as accurate, well written (perhaps more so) and reliable as the main article. Any objections to changing the text of the template? Snalwibma 08:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- I just came here to say the same thing when viewing this template on the Introduction to evolution article. I was going to suggest "more detailed" instead of "full", since depending on the topic one article may not contain the "full" explanation. Perhaps "main" would work as well. Thoughts? --*Spark* 18:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- I think main will be best. Loom91 09:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- I have gone ahead and made that change. Snalwibma 22:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Categorisation
Is there a way to place articles that use this template into the introductions category by topic (automatically categorise Introduction to quantum mechanics as [[Category:Introductions|Quantum mechanics, Introduction to]])? —Dylan Lake 02:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Fixed. Articles should now be sorted automatically based on the name of their parent article. ornis (t) 14:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reverse template?
Is it possible to have a similar template to put on the main article, directing people to the introductory article, and similarly have it populate a category of "Articles that have an introductory article"? Carcharoth 00:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- Such a template already exists and should be used for all cases where this template is used: {{seeintro}}. Loom91 10:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- I've added that to the documentation. Please also see Category:Introductions, for the latest additions which I found using this link. I'm uncertain about Background and genesis of topos theory - please remove that if you think it is inappropriate. Carcharoth 12:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- The 'seeintro' template lacks documentation. Someone should fix that when they have time. Carcharoth 12:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- I've added that to the documentation. Please also see Category:Introductions, for the latest additions which I found using this link. I'm uncertain about Background and genesis of topos theory - please remove that if you think it is inappropriate. Carcharoth 12:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Being systematic about this
It is strange that such a category of article could emerge without any apparent provision for them in policy. At the very least, we need a Wikipedia:Introductory articles policy/project page. Thanks.--Pharos 06:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- The provision already exists in Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible, and I don't see any need for a detailed policy at this moment. What would it say? Loom91 08:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- That's a general guideline for making articles accessible; it does not mention this special category of "introductory articles" (we appear to have just 7 at present) that are not accounted for at all in policy and would technically be AFD-worthy if consensus hadn't already established that some are already FA quality. So, we need a guideline on what sort of topics deserve an ""introductory article", how much they should be simplified, and the specific ways in which their simplification differs from the attempt at reaching a broad audience in the writing of ordinary articles.--Pharos 14:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- That guideline contains the following line in the lead: "Depending on the topic and the amount of interest in it, it may be appropriate to write a separate 'trampoline' article". Loom91 13:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
-