Message: 6 Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 17:34:33 -0400 From: Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] In The News - new name needed To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: 98dd099a0510251434k75868cc2o8bdca051716cb814@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I think this is right. Insisting people not call a page name by its obvious acronym won't work and won't be intuitive. A new page name will be better, and people won't continue calling something by an acronym that no longer makes sense for long (VfD is still comprehensible but becoming less so. And the news section is nowhere as trafficked or used as VfD ever is/was).
So... suggestions?
*Current Events (WP:CE) *News Desk (WP:ND) *Current News (WP:CN --> used currently for Clueless Newbie) *...your suggestion here?
FF
On 10/25/05, Ilya N. ilyanep@gmail.com wrote:
Unless we rename it to something like "Current Events" People will
continue
to abbreviate it ITN out of habit.
~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
On 10/25/05, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I like that idea. But how would we deal with old links? We can't
just
deprecate a link and not replace it. If they call it ITN, it will still be called ITN if it points to [[WP:NEWS]].
I pretty much meant what Flcello suggests below: ask people to call it News (or something) rather than ITN. Not perfect - but most people say AfD not VfD now.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Hmm... I like Current Events better than News Desk or Current News. [[WP:CN]] should stay for clueless newbies.
Flcelloguy
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Hmm... I like Current Events better than News Desk or Current News. [[WP:CN]] should stay for clueless newbies.
Flcelloguy
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.
I think News Desk would be the most apt.
Current Events is too ambiguous -
1.'current' includes the potential for covering 'what is about to happen' as whereas the page needs to be defined to cover what has happened.
2. It overlaps with an already existing page name.
3. It lacks a unique angle in the name.
4. It breaks the link with the existing template name.
5. Because of its ambiguity it may be difficult to get consensus on a rename.
6. Because of its similarity with an existing page name people may well opt to use the existing ITN acronym informally.
News Desk is far stronger as a name.
1. It is unique, with strengthens the ability to create name recognition.
2. It keeps a degree continuity with the same template name, meaning that it is more likely to get a consensus behind it.
3. It would lend itself to the creation of a template.
4. In using 'news desk' it carries a clear recognition factor: 'news desk' is a widely used term when covering news. All newspapers use the term, so again its meaning in clear. It says what it is and says by implication what it isn't.
Thom
___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
How about just "News"? That's all Britannica uses on their front page.
~Mark Ryan
I think that pages which are named "News" on the internet are usually assumed to be news of the site in question, not the "external world" as it may be.
My only problem with Current Events, besides the fact that there is already such a page, is that in U.S. education at the primary/secondary level, "Current Events" is always a tedious session of children giving reports on news articles to the class (at least it was throughout my education). As such it rubs me the wrong way, and might rub others the wrong way. Or maybe it's exactly what we want. Hmm. Well, anyway, I don't think the name matters much, so long as it has a different acronym (I certainly don't feel strongly about it, anyway). I'd almost prefer "Recent News" or even "Recent Events"... but anyway, it's not a big deal either way.
FF
On 10/25/05, Mark Ryan ultrablue@gmail.com wrote:
How about just "News"? That's all Britannica uses on their front page.
~Mark Ryan _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 25/10/05, Fl Celloguy flcelloguy@hotmail.com wrote:
Hmm... I like Current Events better than News Desk or Current News. [[WP:CN]] should stay for clueless newbies.
Yes, this seems a better idea. [[WP:CE]], [[Wikipedia:Current Events]]. ([[Wikipedia:News Desk]] sounds more appropriate for something handling Wikipedia in the media...)
-- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Andrew Gray wrote:
On 25/10/05, Fl Celloguy flcelloguy@hotmail.com wrote:
Hmm... I like Current Events better than News Desk or Current News. [[WP:CN]] should stay for clueless newbies.
Yes, this seems a better idea. [[WP:CE]], [[Wikipedia:Current Events]]. ([[Wikipedia:News Desk]] sounds more appropriate for something handling Wikipedia in the media...)
Excellent, can we have a proper article at [[Current events]] now instead of something that should rightly belong in the Wikipedia namespace?
- -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \