Wikinews talk:Style guide

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!

[edit] Refactors

Discussions which have been implemented in the style guide have been refactored out. Please create a new section to discuss new changes and ideas.

• 15 May 2005
  • Title Capitalization poll, reference vs. source, date vs. dateline vs. byline, date format and templates, use of subpages, use of fullstops in abbreviations, non-internet reference/original notes, names/titles of people, POV issues, spelling, sections, currencies, wide range of updates w/o discussion and w/discussion, citing wires.

[edit] From Talk:China detains and beats mourners for Zhao Ziyang

In an article, the use of links are defined as follows:

• See also
  • Links to related Wikinews, Wikipedia articles, Wikisource documents, Commons and Upload files
• Sources (used in article)
  • Online articles or sites - these are by nature ephemeral and may change, move, or disappear
  • Witnesses and personal observations - these are elements of Wikinews:Original reporting and should be archived online under [[Talk:Article name/Notes]]
• References
  • Texts - should be cited using Author, Title of work, Publisher, copyright and year of publication, ISBN if available
  • Periodical artical (Journals, magazines, newspapers, etc.) cite Author, Title of article, Title of periodical, Volume and/or issue, Publisher, additional identifying characteristics if known.
• External links
  • Online articles or sites which contain related subject matter. Wikinews does not take any responsibility for nor imply support or a relationship with external sites

[edit] single quotes in headlines

I rolled back the recent deletion of style to use single quotations in headlines instead of double quotes since every journalism style guide I found says that news headlines have single - not double quotation marks to set off quoted text. To quote UK Journalism.org, "Double quotes in headlines are the giveaway sign of the amateur journalist." -- Davodd | Talk 8 July 2005 13:10 (UTC)

• It wasn't a deletion of an existing style, it was a dispute of a new style guideline that you had just added. It originally asserted that headlines were quotations of the article, and justified the single quotes on those grounds. Headlines are not quotations, of course. Now, with your second attempt to add this style guideline, it justifies the single quotes on the grounds that only amateurs use double quotes. Ironically, since all Wikinewsies are, pretty much by definition, amateurs, the correct implication of that assertion is that our style guide should be the exact reverse of what you have written, and we should use double quotes, not single quotes. I've therefore corrected the style guide to follow the actual logic of the rationale that it itself puts forward. Uncle G 8 July 2005 19:07 (UTC)
  • I much prefer the single-quote in headline actually. I looked at a lot of headlines and it really does look much nicer to have single quotes. -- IlyaHaykinson 8 July 2005 19:15 (UTC)
    • You may prefer it. Partridge may strongly advocate it. Fowler does not, however, preferring double quotes instead; as does Gowers (TCPW). It is not the subject of unanimous agreement, and is disputed. It is a matter of house style, not a universal convention that everyone adheres to. Moreover, I recommend that all editors who are thinking of settling on single quotation marks as Wikinews house style bear in mind that doing so will result in a less usable "permanent historical record", since single quotes break the search function. (The Wikipedia manual of style and Search guide discuss this quite thoroughly, so I won't re-hash it.) Having London bombing death toll rises to 'more than 50' is not maximally useful if a search for "London bombing death toll rises to more than 50" (sans quotes) won't actually turn it up. Uncle G 8 July 2005 19:54 (UTC)
      • Do people really search for a story by typing the entire headline into the search box? I doubt it. People usually search by single words or small groups of words. And in the case of searching for the word "fockers" shows the following result: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=fockers&go=Go So, I really don't think the search argument is valid for a news wiki as it may be for an encyclopedia or book wiki. Anyway, every major accepted journalism style guide in the English language that I have found says that news headlines use single quotes. Then again, most also say that quotes in headlines should be avoided whenever possible - which would make this argument moot. :-) -- Davodd | Talk 20:49, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
        • A strawman question. The point is quite clear (please read the Wikipedia explanation) that searches for any of the words that happen to have single quotation marks around them will fail. The argument is valid for all wikis that use the WikiMedia software. Uncle G 10:37, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
        • Ok, in the interest of preventing an edit war, can we leave this up to the editors, and take out all guidelines about quotation marks in headlines? -- IlyaHaykinson 21:14, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
          • The guideline serves the purpose of bringing WN volunteer writers into a more professionally accepted level of writing within the larger journalism community. If Wikinews is to fulfill its goals, one of which includes being a free news source for other news organizations, we should not dismiss or fail to adopt common standards of the profession. -- Davodd | Talk 21:19, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
            • "common" != "universal", as the references to Fowler and Gowers above should have amply demonstrated. Uncle G 10:37, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
              • Isn't the Fowler and Gowers style guide meant for writing scholarly essays? In journalism, I'd rather go by AP Style or other respected style guides of the journalism profession, all of which say to use single quotes.. -- Davodd | Talk 08:36, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
          • I think it definitely needs to be specified in the style guide which kind of quotes are to be used so that articles will be consistent. I also think that single quotes in headlines look better, and it seems like that is how every other news source does it. Leif 21:36, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
            • And the fact that the search function thus won't work doesn't bother you? Uncle G 10:37, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
              • I have doubts about the search thing is as valid in this project as at WP. I have yet to hear of a person who actually searches for a news story by typing the entire headline - and not just one or two topic words. -- Davodd | Talk 08:36, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
              • The goal to bring writers to a more professionally accepted level of writing seems to be in conflict with denying the journalistic common practice of single quoting headlines. A technical problem doesn't seem sufficient a reason to alter a style guide; if the search function problem bothers you, spend your energies fixing it. Isn't that the Wiki way? 11:07, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

In the U.S. we use double quotation marks. Single quotation marks are British style. Check out the "Chicago Manual of Style." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.19.76.53 (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Periods in titles

So I added periods to the section that recommends using "Mr" to say "Mr.", on the assumption that I was fixing it. But now I notice that the BBC uses "Mr", which to my American eyes looks sloppy and incorrect. Personally, I don't see why anyone should use such titles, but I guess it's been decided not to use the usual American style that way? (The major exception I know of being the New York Times.) In any case, should there be periods or not? (If not, that should probably be explicitly mentioned.) -- Beland 13:16, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Like much of Wikinews, this is a difference between British and American styles, and is left up to the first author. -- IlyaHaykinson 14:01, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

The rule I remember being taught many years ago (in a British school) was that if the last letter of the shortened form uses the last letter of the word, no full stop (period) is used. So Reverend Jones become Rev. Jones but Doctor Jones becomes Dr Jones. --Yaf201 13:03, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Regional style differences are not a part of the Wikinews Style guide. It is, like spelling, determined first by the region being written about, second by original author's choice. - Amgine / ^talk 23:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

In the U.S. we use double quotation marks. Single quotation marks are British style. Check out the "Chicago Manual of Style."

[edit] Why comma instead of and

There is a guide to "Use comma, not 'and' or '&'" in headline. I don't get it. Even the example seems worse to me with comma instead of and. What is this rule about? --62.78.195.223 19:20, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Natural breaks when people read are always better than using 'and', which promotes rushed headlines. I think. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 19:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I must disagree. I still think "Powell and Annan set international goals for aid" is better than "Powell, Annan set international goals for aid". --62.78.195.223 20:35, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I like it better without the "and". Bawolff ☺☻ 05:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I think the 'and' should be used in that example, as it reads more easily and 'Powell, Annan' might read to some as a way of writing 'Annan Powell' with surname first... Frankie Roberto 09:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Because that is the standard journalistic practice in the English language. Wikinews adopted such standards to help with the professionalism of our end product. Davodd -

Whatever individual preferences may be, it's worth noting that the use of a comma is not "standard journalistic practise in the English language"; no newspapers or online media use that syntax in British-English. A British newspaper, for example, would always run with "Blair and Bush meet at conference" and never "Blair, Bush meet at conference."

69.228.250.178 23:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Minute points

[edit] Large numbers

The decimal can be used to spell out large fractional numbers such as one and one-half million to be "1.5 million" instead of "1,500,000" or "1 500 000". In UK and North America commas are used as thousand separators and points are used as decimal separators. In other regions (e.g. South Africa) a space is used as a thousands separator and the comma is used as the decimal separator. Either is appropriate, but use first the style used in the region written about, second the style of the original author.

Canada uses spaces. In fact I thought spaces were a metric thing and commas were the imperial system. I see , alot from things in the us.

Spaces are being used to replace millenial separators due to two primary systems which are exactly opposite: using dots as millenial separators and commas as decimal marker, and vice versa. Currently common online styles are to use spaces as the millenial separator and the mid-dot for the decimal marker: 1 234·56 (mid-dot can be inserted with · or alt-0183 on many keyboards) - Amgine | ^talk 00:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I have never seen the "1 234·56" style... please point to some resources that use that method! -- IlyaHaykinson 07:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Isn't that ussually used for multiplying? I've also never seen that used as a decimal point. Bawolff ☺☻ 09:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Decimal Fractions

Either a comma or a point is acceptable ie 1,5 is the same as 1.5; however, in English the latter is the more common and readily understandable format.

I disagree, as , is ussually understood to be a large number seperater to be , and have yet to see a , used as a point in english.

Bawolff ☺☻ 21:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

• In my various trips and time spent in Canada, I found it much more common to use commas than spaces, albeit I'm sure that both are quite common. It's much like spelling, whatever is more comfortable with the author(s).
• In some European nations, primarily those using the Euro currency, commas are used instead of periods (but still denote a decimal of a whole number).

I wouldn't be too worried about it, just whatever is more comfortable for the user. Others can edit it if they wish. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 21:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification needed on sources

Hi all, was wondering if we could get clarification over the format for citing sources. I got into a back-and-forth with MrM on Saturday re: who is the publisher if site X republishes a story from wire service Y. I cited this section:

When referencing a story from a wire news agency that has been syndicated in another news source, we should identify the wire news agency as the publisher, not the carrying news media. Thus, a report written by the Associated Press that appears in The Guardian would be attributed to the Associated Press. The main syndication agencies are Associated Press (AP), Reuters, and AFP.

I read it to mean: [Some dumb news story], Wire service, Date (via News Site). MrM wanted: Wire service [Some dumb news story], News Site, Date.

However, I'm reading it again and the style guide appears to back up MrM as well:

Articles from news sites which are initially from a wire service should have the wire service added to the author's name, or just the wire service if no author is given. For example, "author=Anne Gearan, Associated Press".

So we were both right, but WN:SG is ambiguous here. MrM did make a good point in our discussion on IRC that technically the site is the publisher, as it makes the editorial decision as to whether to carry the article or not, which contradicts the first paragraph above. Not sure what the original rationale was behind the first paragraph; does anyone know?

Anyway, this really needs to be clear...if we're gonna be harping on folks to source their articles, they may as well be consistent, which means the guidelines need to be consistent as well. --Aloha, KeithH (talk) 08:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Who published it? The wire service didn't, did they? -Edbrown05 08:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

some wire services do publish their stories themselves as well as syndicating it, eg. reuters. maybe we can make it a point to link to the story on the wire service's own site whenever possible and use a syndicating publisher only when the wire service doesn't publish itself (in which case, i think, the wire service gets to be author and syndicating site gets to be publisher). Doldrums 09:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

i would defer to publisher -Edbrown05 10:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The choice is ultimately made by the publisher, so I think it's appropriate to show where it is published (AP, for example, does not have a separate publication, and relies on other publishers to distribute their content). --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 21:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I made a straw man change to the page. [1] Fire at will.  :) --Aloha, KeithH (talk) 08:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

The part on image and picture usage saying "When including pictures with Wikinews stories, they must abide to the Wikicommons guidelines, namely copyrighted or trademarked images may not be used" seems a bit wrong considering Wikinews:Fair use and Wikinews:Image use policy. We also might want to reference the reader of the style guide to the fair use and image use policy pages as well. I'd change it, but I don't want to change something in the style guide and me be wrong about it =) -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 13:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• I agree, it's even more important for us as a news story to be able to use fair use and non-commercial images than it is for an encylopedia, as there may simply be no other option (although clearly if there are other options, they'd be preferable). As we already have a page with our image use policy, I've edited the page to link to that, as I can't see this changing being very controversial... Frankie Roberto 14:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• For what it's worth, I agree it should be changed. (Someone probably already has…) I think Ash Lux has the right idea here. Karen 20:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cuurency Symbol-Indian rupee.

I suggest we use Rs. (Re. for singular) as the symbol for the Indian rupee. PVJ(Talk) 14:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

This seems reasonable to me. maybe on first use, we could include a hyperlink to the wikipedia entry Indian rupee for those unfamiliar with the rupee. As India's economic influence continues to grow, i suspect that more and more people will become familar with the currency.

--TrueBrit 09:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Surnames / Family Names

The CIA World factbook has the following standard for writing names;

Personal Names - Capitalization The Factbook capitalizes the surname or family name of individuals for the convenience of our users who are faced with a world of different cultures and naming conventions. The need for capitalization, bold type, underlining, italics, or some other indicator of the individual's surname is apparent in the following examples: MAO Zedong, Fidel CASTRO Ruz, George W. BUSH, and TUNKU SALAHUDDIN Abdul Aziz Shah ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Hisammuddin Alam Shah. By knowing the surname, a short form without all capital letters can be used with confidence as in President Castro, Chairman Mao, President Bush, or Sultan Tunku Salahuddin. The same system of capitalization is extended to the names of leaders with surnames that are not commonly used such as Queen ELIZABETH II. For Vietnamese names, the given name is capitalized because officials are referred to by their given name rather than by their surname. For example, the president of Vietnam is Tran Duc LUONG. His surname is Tran, but he is referred to by his given name - President LUONG.

The story Thai_PM_Shinawatra_ousted_by_coup made me think that Wikinews should adopt something similar to prevent confusion on how to refer to people world wide.

What do you think?

--TrueBrit 09:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Punctuation in headlines?

I joined Wikinews today and renamed 2 articles. For both, it seemed natural to use a colon. Although punctuation isn't mentioned in the style guide, I noticed that Wikinews headlines very rarely have punctuation. Did I make a bad newbie mistake (or 2)?

• French inspection: North Korean ship has no illegal cargo
• Proposal for Buffalo, N.Y. hotel reportedly dead: parcels for sale "by owner"

--Hrothulf 20:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Measurements?

I'm just wondering if there is a standard that should be used for measurements. I've seen in a couple of articles a combination of different measurement systems (ie. Miles per hour and degrees Celsius appearing in the same article, and paragraph). I'm just wondering if Wikinews has a convention for this, should we be using SI or American measurements? Thanks. Liamhanks 13:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there is a standard set yet. And it's unlikely that were going to opt for the exclusive use of one system. Consistency is of course the main issue. Some considerations:

• You can explain the measure in the other system between brackets: 6 foot (1.80m)
• As you say, mixing different systems is strange. Perhaps the system used should also be in line with the spelling used and with the location.
• The problem extends to currencies, as for example I don't have a clue of the value of an Australian dollar. A wikilink is a minimum effort.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I like metric, but I'm biased as I live in a country where metric is common. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Downsizing Titles

WikiNews should act as any other new source, and use full grammar and capitalization rules in its headlines. Club2007 00:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

we had a poll at the beginning to decide which type to use. the results were in favour of down-style. Note some other news sources also do that. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article length

See discussion about this at Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy#Minimum_length_of_articles_and_breaking_news

[edit] Stating days

What is the style on referring to the day the events are happening? Today, yesterday, tomorrow? Or say the day? For example:

• Tropical Storm Gonu headed toward Iran today, after lashing Oman yesterday with high winds and torrential rains.
• Tropical Storm Gonu headed toward Iran on Thursday, after lashing Oman on Wednesday with high winds and torrential rains.

I read the style guide but didn't see a reference to these examples. Wisekwai 11:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

As long as the article is done today either would be acceptable, but I'd say go with the latter because that gives scope for not having a rename if publication is delayed. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

you can use "today", "yesterday" ... etc, speaking in terms of the article's dateline (not the time of writing). however, be aware that readers from around the world may read these to mean "today", etc in their local time. if the time info is significant, might be useful to include references to local times, UTC etc. flip side is the text looks a lot more complicated. –Doldrums(talk) 11:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I've used both styles here and in my own work, and I'm not sure which I like better. What I'm leaning towards is that because only the date and not the day is given in the date at the top of the story, is that today, yesterday and tomorrow would be more appropriate. Saying the day might make me want to take my eyes off the screen and look at the calendar. Anyway, the date is right there at the top of the page, and I think folks reading stuff on the Internet are accustomed to the vagaries of the International Dateline, so when the story says today, tomorrow, yesterday, it refers to the date the story is written. Once you're past the lead, then you can get a bit more detailed about the exact time and UTC/GMT conversion, and avoid the clutter in the opening paragraph.

Another thing I've always struggled with is how to refer to the days beyond tomorrow, yesterday and today. The style I'm most familiar with is if the day is within seven days, say the name of the day, "on Saturday", "last Friday"; beyond that, state the date, "on May 31", "on June 15", etc.Wisekwai 12:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

what u've outlined, viz "today", etc in lead; more precise info later on; day names for the preceding and following week; and dates o/w, are the best guidelines i can think of. it's also more or less what we tend to use. so go with these, and i wouldn't mind seeing these added to the style guide as well. –Doldrums(talk) 12:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image caption question

Wikinews:Style guide#Image captions states:

"Image captions should be made of complete sentences."

What about images that aren't complete sentences, or where it makes more sense to merely state what the object is? (the article that raised this question for me is Canadian dollar reaches parity with US dollar, but an even better example would be Canadian dollar reaches parity with US dollar)

Later, the page refers to the Wikipedia MOS for items not covered by this (being an en.wp admin, I'm well versed with it); over there, if it isn't a complete sentence, there's no period, but there's also no insistence that everything be a complete sentence. So, should that caption be reworded, or should the style guideline be rephrased to address instances where the caption isn't a complete sentence? EVula // talk // 22:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

One of the key pillars of Wikinews is that nobody obeys the "rules". ;)

In all seriousness, I don't think anyone takes the MOS to the letter. I don't believe we've done more than a handful of articles that completely obey it. You should go ahead and make an edit to it reflecting what you think would be more reasonable, and then post the diff here (or on the watercooler) for review. If nobody fights it, hey, that's policy. :) irid t i e 22:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Currency Codes

I like the changes you made to the currency section, SVTCobra, and appreciate the link to the ISO codes. I went ahead and changed the examples to the 3-character codes. I think users should be encouraged to use the 3-character codes for the common dollars (USD, CAD etc.) Jcart1534 02:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Jcart. I would also encourage others to review the changes I've made to the currency section. I haven't finished, as I want to overhaul both the $ and £ subsections, but I am afraid that I am done for tonight, and that might mean that it'll be a few days before I do the rest as my weekend is fairly busy. --SVTCobra 03:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, no, I think you have misunderstood. Symbols should not be used in conjunction with three-letter codes. It's an "either-or" situation. So, I will try to finish up tonight. Sleep be damned! --SVTCobra 03:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Oops! I see now...the symbol is not necessary due to the "D". Sorry. Should I revert my changes so you can revamp properly or just leave it for now? Jcart1534 03:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I updated the "dollar" section. But now, I am truly done for the night. G'nite. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SVTCobra (talk • contribs) 03:38, 15 December 2007

Good work, SVT. Cheers, Jcart1534 03:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Date format

The prescribed date format for Wikinews is "month day, year", a style most frequently associated with American usage although it can be seen in other nations. This contrasts with the "day month year" format which is used by the United Nations (e.g. [2], [3]) and is commonplace in Europe (e.g. [4], [5]) and many international bodies (e.g. OECD, NATO, UPU). The existing date format seems to carry some American bias, which runs into trouble with WN:NPOV. The more logical day-month-year ordering would seem to involve less NPOV trouble from an international perspective.

Another, arguably more practical, problem the current date format brings is in terms of logical ordering. See Category:Wikinews Shorts for an example of how things can get out of order.

ISO 8601 is another useful format to consider, especially for date ordering e.g. 2008-09-27. If Wikinews Shorts: April 17, 2007 were to become Wikinews Shorts (2007-04-17) instead, then the titles and shorts category would be easy to sort in date order. Perhaps title conventions would be a good first step in date format reform. DL+1613 (talk) 15:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually the above shorts example could also be titled Wikinews Shorts: 2007-04-17, closer to the current style. Whether its nicer to use colons or parentheses could be a debate in itself. DL+1613 (talk) 15:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Numeric formats are no use - people will misread them where there isn't a >12 for the day number. Spelling the month out makes it unambiguous to all, and in any format that is going to cause sorting issues. Live with what we've got; it works, even if you need to get used to it. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 15:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree. DD MONTH YYYY seems the least ambiguous, with the full spelling for the month. Articles *shouldn't* autosort YYYYMMDD, simply because that's not the best method for browsing news articles. However, if the date issue is important consider bringing it up on the Watercooler and gaining a clear community consensus. - Amgine | ^t 17:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)