Wikipedia talk:Date formatting and linking poll: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Turning date linking off in one fell swoop: new section |
Locke Cole (talk | contribs) →When can we expect results?: responses |
||
Line 571:
::The problem right now is that auto formatting has not been rejected (at present it's "no consensus"), and delinking dates would also remove the auto formatting (which still has the previously existing consensus until such time as it is rejected). I'm not willing to sacrifice all the marked up dates we have currently, especially if any agreed upon auto formatting system ultimately utilizes the link syntax (which would mean all the effort to delink dates would be for naught). It makes more sense to continue discussion and try to determine what would satisfy people regarding auto formatting. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
:::But auto formatting would use that new wikitext thing (sorry, I forget the syntax- that recent mediawiki extension that does what the date links did). So date linking for the purposes of formatting is obsolete and there aren't any scenarios where we would still be using the old date link approach, right? I've not been following this super closely, but I don't see why all editors can't be removing links that make no sense just because they happen to link to a year article with a kajillion inbound links that also make no sense. Either auto formatting is approved or not, you keep the meaningful date links, but the rest of them get the red pen. If that is not fair to some side for some reason, then fine, I'll sit down. I just thought there was agreement from both sides on that much. -[[User:J JMesserly|J JMesserly]] ([[User talk:J JMesserly|talk]]) 01:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::::I think we should leave Ohconfucius alone with his rather silly ideas regarding "consensus". —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 11:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
::::The formatdate parser function? People argued that the existing systems syntax was "too complicated" by virtue of it using square brackets (as with normal links). I can only imagine the kind of complaints we'd receive if we forced people to mark dates up using <nowiki><code>{{#formatdate:November 11, 2001}}</code></nowiki>... There's been a proposal to simply remove the linking in the software, but for whatever reason this continues to be resisted. It's simpler, doesn't involve the use of bots, and keeps dates auto formatted. (And of course the other issues can be fixed with time, assuming opponents don't try for RFC5 and a half...). —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 11:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
== Throwing fuel onto the fire - Google Timeline ==
| |||