Template talk:Cite web: Difference between revisions
imported>Derek Harkness (Suggest unlinking of dates) |
imported>Paul Derry No edit summary |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| doi = | | doi = | ||
| accessdate = May 6, 2007}} | | accessdate = May 6, 2007}} | ||
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) | |||
Revision as of 00:11, 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
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)