Template talk:Cite web: Difference between revisions
imported>Derek Harkness (Suggest unlinking of dates) |
imported>Derek Harkness m (→Needless linking of dates: sig) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| doi = | | doi = | ||
| accessdate = May 6, 2007}} | | accessdate = May 6, 2007}} | ||
[[User:Derek Harkness|Derek Harkness]] 01:32, 6 May 2007 (CDT) | |||
Having all those dates linked always bothered me... Ok yeah, you can browse by day or by year, but that's the only use that I can see, or am I short sighted? I mean, I suppose each year could be a category with a brief overview of the world at large on it, but that would require a good deal of work. Or at least a very, very clever summarizing bot... | |||
Cheers, | |||
-[[User:Paul Derry|Paul Derry]] 01:11, 6 May 2007 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:32, 6 May 2007
Needless linking of dates
The current template links the access date. Given that the access date isn't really a significant event in history, I see no reason for all the links. Is anyone really going to follow them? I have made a new template at {{cite web2}} that does not link the date. I suggest, after testing, that we replace this template with the new one.
To compair the difference. Here's the current template:
- Local Leadership. Gov.cn (Nov 6, 2006). Retrieved on May 6, 2007.
And here's the suggested new template
Derek Harkness 01:32, 6 May 2007 (CDT)
Having all those dates linked always bothered me... Ok yeah, you can browse by day or by year, but that's the only use that I can see, or am I short sighted? I mean, I suppose each year could be a category with a brief overview of the world at large on it, but that would require a good deal of work. Or at least a very, very clever summarizing bot...
Cheers, -Paul Derry 01:11, 6 May 2007 (CDT)