Template talk:Developing stories

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

January 2005[edit]

I don't like this template/page. Once a story is written it's always developing because that's how a wiki works, making this section rather redundant. Dan100 (Talk) 16:13, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I fully agree with Dan100, any story will keep on being developed, so really there IS no point of having this page unless you put the developing stories on it, which would make the Devoloping Stories section pointless Cafzal 25 Jan 2005
The developing stories template is used as a central page to indicate articles which are not currently considered "front-page ready". It is included in other templates, to make it available in more than one place, to attract editors who are not interested in creating new articles but would like to collaborate on existing ones. - Amgine 17:51, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, I see a problem, there are stories that are put on the main part of the front page that are even more messed up than the developing ones. In addition, by the time the 'developing' stories get put into the main section, they are outdated. Lastly, ALL stories are developing and are being fixed, or, otherwise, maybe there should not be a "fix it" link in the discription of the main article section. It just makes no sence to have some flawed articles in the mainstream, and some equally or even less flawed articles in the developing section. Cafzal 25 Jan 2005

Manual list[edit]

The purpose of the manual list is to accommodate users who do not wish to use the automated system, do not know how to use the automated system, or who use the space to figure out the name of their article. Which is why after an article is automatically listed, it should be removed from the manual list. First of all, if an article is automatically listed, that demonstrates that the article uses the automatic system, and therefore does not need to be listed manually at that point. Second, once an article is listed automatically, it becomes redundant to update the link under the manual section every time someone changes the name of the article, or if the article is moved to Published stories. This is the purpose of the automatic list, to make it so we don't have to keep editing the list whenever a change is made. NGerda June 29, 2005 20:21 (UTC)

Excuse me, did you just say that if someone [does] not wish to use the automated system their article should be forced into using it if it shows up in the automated system?
No, I said the exact opposite of that. I said if they don't wish to use it, that's what the manual list is for. NGerda June 29, 2005 20:41 (UTC)
No, you said "after an article is automatically listed, it should be removed from the manual list." Even when the user does not wish to use the automated system. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 20:49 (UTC)
My exact words were The purpose of the manual list is to accommodate users who do not wish to use the automated system. When an article uses the automated system, then it should be removed from the manual list. That is not imposing a system on anyone. NGerda June 29, 2005 21:00 (UTC)
It most certainly is. I do not wish the article I began, which is in development, to be removed from the manual list. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 21:12 (UTC)
Using the Wikinews categories does not imply any participation in this system. It just means an article is using categories, one of the items in the Style guide which should be in all articles.
Let's stop calling it "participation" then OK? People use Wikinews categories, as you say all articles should use them, and this uses that data to compile a list. That's the beauty of this system. It uses existing data. NGerda June 29, 2005 20:41 (UTC)
It also requires people to use your system in order for their articles to be listed on the main page, if it is implemented as you say you would like it implemented. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 20:49 (UTC)
Why d you call it "my system"? You yourself said that Wikinews categories should be in all articles. That's an already implemented system. NGerda June 29, 2005 21:00 (UTC)
Categories are a Mediawiki system. Your system of using DPL on the developing stories template is exactly that - your system. There is not community agreement to implement it yet. Period. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 21:12 (UTC)
The automated list at the development level requires the same number edits as without it. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 20:36 (UTC)
No it does not. Only a very minor edit once per day. NGerda June 29, 2005 20:41 (UTC)
Exactly the same number of edits to create an article link, and then to delete it later. Plus the additional "create a day" task for someone who could otherwise be working on the site. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 20:49 (UTC)
Where did you get that? The old system would require an edit to the list every time someone changed the name of an article, and to remove it from the list and add it to another list when they wanted it to be published. With the new system, All that a user has to do is change a tag from {{Develop}} to {{Publish}} on the article. That's right, no more running around Wikinews to edit lists to publish your article. It's just a word-change away. The only edit that needs to be made is to change the dates the DPL displays, once per day. NGerda June 29, 2005 21:00 (UTC)
An initial article link must be created. That article link must be removed. Quid pro quo. Article name changes are very rarely actually reflected on the DS, as you are aware. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 21:12 (UTC)

Amgine, when the story links on W:SU are removed, they can be done all at once. So instead of having to remove each story, one by one as it's published, you can take a whole bunch out at once (it doesn't matter how much time passes before then). That is fewer edits. Dan100 (Talk) 30 June 2005 07:30 (UTC)

Thanks very much NGerda for your work on this. I can't tell you how many times the first thing I did upon arriving on site was to clean 'Developing stories' list of dones. A maintenance hassle has just been solved by your outstanding contribution. -Edbrown05 5 July 2005 18:22 (UTC)

Proposing a solution to the article link problem[edit]

Amgine mentions often that we must have an article link to write a story. That might be true from the perspective of how we've always done it, but it makes little sense from a point of view of a news site. I propose instead a small extension that renders into a text input field and a button called "Create article". We can stick this extension wherever we want to have a new article place. Clicking the button will try to create an article with the title specified in the text box. This extension is trivial and is something we can put together in much less time than if we continue bickering. Thoughts? -- IlyaHaykinson 30 June 2005 07:48 (UTC)

Very good idea, will you write it? Dan100 (Talk) 2 July 2005 12:14 (UTC)
I've just done it myself :-). Thanks for the idea, Ilya. The inputbox extension I put together supports both a search box and a "create an article" box. Before putting it live, I'd like to review it a bit further and perhaps add support for preloading a template into the edit box, which could help newbies.--Eloquence 2 July 2005 12:18 (UTC)
The extension now has the above feature, and is documented at m:Inputbox extension. I'll ask Brion to review it and hopefully we'll be able to put it in use within the next few days. This might also deprecate Wikinews:Submit a story.--Eloquence 2 July 2005 15:19 (UTC)

Ah, so you wrote it! Thanks Elo. Dan100 (Talk) 5 July 2005 17:41 (UTC)

Best to wikify tables[edit]

I wikified the table for the input - non-wiki markup tends to look freaky on some screens. -- Davodd | Talk 7 July 2005 09:53 (UTC)

Input box[edit]

Dan100 has removed the article input box, claiming it's "unpopular". This inputbox make it very easy for newcomers to create articles and see the format we follow at Wikinews. Many of our articles have been created with this inputbox, and I firmly believe it should stay on this template. -- NGerda 08:33, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Dan, please explain this change on the discussion page or point to where this discussion is happening.--Eloquence 09:54, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I liked the input box too, bring it back! although, while we're on the subject I think it's worth emphasising to users that it will be the story's headline/page name as I don't think newbies always realised and they didn't think the title through, leading to redirects having to be made. ClareWhite

Lovely, you *can* be reverted. Sure. -- Amgine 14:55, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

What is the argument against including the input box on the main page? --Chiacomo (talk) 23:18, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Inputbox simplified[edit]

It's very frustrating to see reverts after weeks of successful use without any discussion. If the argument here is that the new page leads to an overly complex template, I think we should instead work on simplifying said template. For example, we could use the version at Template:Simple new page for the Main Page inputbox.--Eloquence 23:08, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion[edit]

Since there are (apparently) a limited number of 'nocats' we can have, i'd like to propose changing Deletion requests to Speedy deletion. I think it's more important that these get straight off the page as often an admin can't get to them straight away, while deletion requests should often be discussed by the community. However, there's quite a lot of cleaning up to be done with this change so I didn't have the energy to do it before checking ClareWhite 14:47, 24 August 2005 (UTC) PS trying out my flag template here too :)

I'd suggest dropping "Local only" instead (I must have missed the explanation for that one...) it would help if I read my talk page more often... Dan100 (Talk) 14:51, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
It uses the "Deletion requests" because it will include stories marked for speedy deletion also. We can also add more nocats if needed, it just requires a developer to change an option in one file. --Cspurrier 16:07, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Who do we ask? It does seem to trip us up quite a lot and it looks silly to have random articles in the DS list on the mainpage, though I accept they shoudl be listed somewhere to keep things tidy ClareWhite 09:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

local only: please reinstate[edit]

Please could an admin put back Local only as a nocategory on the developing story. This is being used by choice in some local-only published articles (on the Quaker and Brampton pages) and are not developed, nor is there any interest at all in quite so many Quaker stories on the main page, I say this as the person who initiated many of them. This should be discussed somewhere properly before a protected template is changed and loads of stories spill onto the main page (I will now go and see if it has been discussed...) ClareWhite 15:01, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Prepared Stories[edit]

Perhaps this isn't the best place to make this request, but as a suggestion, I think that Prepared Stories (Category:Prepared stories) should not be in this list. When a prepared story becomes a developing story, then it should show up. For example, SpaceX launches Falcon I rocket has been on this list for about a month, and may be there another month simply because the event hasn't happened yet and I am truly developing this story. It will show up on Wikinews:Workspace as a prepared story anyway, so it won't get missed by diligent contributors/admins or as a "stealth" story cluttering up the database.

Add the following line to the page:

notcategory=Prepared stories

Thanks. --Robert Horning 22:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)