I didn't want to go ahead and do this because I wanted to see what other editors thought of it first.

Anyways, I was thinking about making a template that would mark on the page that it needed a released/retired date (and put it in a category), kind of like {{VMKStub}}. Maybe like {{needdate}} or something.

What it could look like (editing mode):

''This item is missing a {{released}} and/or {{retired}} date. Please help DOW by [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|ac tion=edit}} adding it]. If you are not an editor, you can help by reporting it [http://www.vmkforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94968 here].''

[[Category:Pages That Need Released/Retired Dates]]

What it could look like (non-editing mode):

This item is missing a Released: and/or Retired: date. Please help DOW by adding ithttp://xs221.******/xs221/07451/wikilink.JPG. If you are not an editor, you can help by reporting it herehttp://xs221.******/xs221/07451/wikilink.JPG.

It's just an idea that popped into my head. I would like to hear what other wiki editors have to think. :)

--Scootz

I have two questions Scootz.

1) Where exactly on the template would this all go?

2) Would this make a new page, listing items that need release and or retired dates, like the stub pages? If not, I think it should, so people who know what ones need it, so it causes less searching.

It sounds like a good idea though!!

~HAMD

Personally (and this is my personal opinion, I'm open to other suggestions) I don't like the "this article stinks - you can help" stuff. :) I'd rather a template more like {{unknown}} which will display a question mark (perhaps) and automatically put the article/item in the TODO category.

What do you mean by "this article stinks - you can help"? Also, I've been thinking about it, and why should we make a template for it, if we are just going to put it in TODO anyway. We usually put a TODO in the category or discussion, if we put it in the page itself, we can put a note at the bottom telling it needs release re-release or retired dates.

~HAMD

I would go with Priz's idea. Becuase if you do it the other way then people will think that the DOW is wrong and not to use it. So it's easier if you go with a unknown and looks more better.

I can agree with that Fancyface. I'm open to any other thoughts of course!

~HAMD

Like I said, it was something I randomly thought of. I didn't expect it to be used, it was just a small suggestion.

Personally (and this is my personal opinion, I'm open to other suggestions) I don't like the "this article stinks - you can help" stuff. :) I'd rather a template more like {{unknown}} which will display a question mark (perhaps) and automatically put the article/item in the TODO category.

I like this idea Priz. :)

Except where I quote others, this is my opinion and my opinion only.


What do you mean by "this article stinks - you can help"?


Sorry, I was being a little snarky.

Basically, I'm not a big fan of the messages that say something like "This article is a stub, you can improve it." I see messages like this as saying "this article has problems" right on the article itself. It looks unprofessional and vague to me.

I much prefer admitting where there are specific things we don't know (like a release date) or specific things to do (like we do with {{todo}}). These still maintain the professional image of the page or entry and acknowledge there are things we need to know more about.


Also, I've been thinking about it, and why should we make a template for it, if we are just going to put it in TODO anyway. We usually put a TODO in the category or discussion, if we put it in the page itself, we can put a note at the bottom telling it needs release re-release or retired dates.

This is part of what I think an {{unknown}} tag can do. It can automatically put it in the TODO category, and still make it look professional. (And make it easy to find what we need to fix.)

Except where I quote others, this is my opinion and my opinion only.



Sorry, I was being a little snarky.

Basically, I'm not a big fan of the messages that say something like "This article is a stub, you can improve it." I see messages like this as saying "this article has problems" right on the article itself. It looks unprofessional and vague to me.

I much prefer admitting where there are specific things we don't know (like a release date) or specific things to do (like we do with {{todo}}). These still maintain the professional image of the page or entry and acknowledge there are things we need to know more about.



This is part of what I think an {{unknown}} tag can do. It can automatically put it in the TODO category, and still make it look professional. (And make it easy to find what we need to fix.)Ah, yes, I do think the stubs are a little much, like some of the pages that are blank, it should be TODO not a stub.

That is true, didn't think about it sticking out for other editors to see. Yes, having an {{unkonwn}} tag bringing it to TODO would be a good idea.

What we are talking about is that some of our info. on when the item comes out, back out, or retired are missing. So, to make it look better for people, and so the editors know what the page needs, we could put a template (a template is just something that makes it look something colorful, or different from regular typing, that makes a page look better) that looks like Unkown (or some other color) so people know what is missing.


On the Unknown, I usually put a question mark next to it, and put a TODO tag in the category, so it doesn't stick out, but it goes to the TODO page.

~HAMD

I made an {{unknown}} template. I started to put it on pages but decided to ask the other editors how it was before continuing.

You can view it here (http://www.disneysonlineworlds.com/index.php/Template:Unknown).

--Scootz

I've made some small adjustments to it, but otherwise I think its working out well.

It looks good to me, so it goes to any date we don't know i see, not just released/re-/retired.

~HAMD