Forums: Yew Grove > Retrieval dates
Replacement filing cabinet
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 28 July 2011 by Thebrains222.

Previous thread: Forum:Red asterisks for retrieved dates on citation templates
My proposal is to show the retrieval date in references. The reason is it tells viewers precisely what date a source was retrieved, without them having to view the source to determine this info, which is more convenient for them (so it basically tells people how long ago it was retrieved and it may be outdated in a simpler and quicker fashion). We could put this info in the hover text, but I think it would be more convenient for viewers to just list it on the page itself.

In summary, adding the retrieval dates is more informative and convenient for viewers than not including the retrieval dates. Discuss, Smithing (talk | contribs) 22:35, July 3, 2011 (UTC)


Comment - I feel like you could just go ahead and do it, but if this really requires a consensus, I of course support. Andrew talk 01:47, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose, do hover text instead - The red asterisks were put in place for a reason; the current way, the retrieval dates don't clutter up the References section. Because honestly, all editors really need to know is whether or not a reference is outdated; if they really need to know the retrieval date, then they can look at the hover text you proposed as an alternative, which I support. User:C Teng/sig 03:00, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Can you give an example of how this would look in use?

  1. REDIRECT User:-Matt/sig 07:28, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
1. ^ Mod Fetzki (28 April 2009). "Summoning Upgrade and Hairstyles". RuneScape News. Retrieved 22 May 2011.
2. ^ Mod Fetzki. "Summoning Upgrade and Hairstyles". 28 Apr 2009. RuneScape News. *
Just a couple of examples. Smithing (talk | contribs) 14:57, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Per Andrew. Having asterisks and hover text is absolutely futile. I mean seriously... 10 characters isn't going to harm anyone...

  1. REDIRECT User:-Matt/sig 04:37, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Are you intending on us putting in the date manually so it comes out shorter than putting five tildes (12:17, July 5, 2011 (UTC))? User:C Teng/sig 12:17, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

We could always do {{#time:d F Y|~~~~~}} in the template, to let putting ~~~~~ in the parameter would still work. That part shouldn't be a problem. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 12:22, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

Comment- I actually like the hover text idea quite well. The asterisk is ok. I am currently trying to fix a huge horde of cluttered unverified reference list. For now that might just make more work trying to find when the date was when these references were made... That's the sad part. It will be hell trying to bring all those pages up to speed with new thing. I am already having problems trying to fix all the things that need to be re verified. And if we have to fix EVERY page. that is a bit of a problem. Now i just contradicted my own opinion hope your happy. User:Coaster4321/Sig 23:38, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - There is no consensus to change the way retrieval dates will be displayed/used. 222 talk 06:36, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.