Template talk:Cite press release

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Cite press release is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template. Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases. Any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes, categories or interwiki links.

This template is a simpler replacement for Template:Press release reference. It provides lower case parameters only.

[edit] Purpose (migration from Template:Press release reference)

press release reference    cite press release
-----------------------    ------------------
Organisation            →  publisher
Date                    →  date
URL                     →  url
Title                   →  title (required)
                        →  accessdate

[edit] Usage

{{cite press release
  |publisher=
  |date=
  |url=
  |format=
  |title=
  |accessdate=
 }}

• title is required, the rest are optional
• publisher: Issuer of press release
• date: Date the press release was released on
• url: Link to the press release if available online
  • format: Format, i.e. PDF. Don't specify for HTML (implied as default).
• accessdate: Date when item was accessed. Use ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format.

[edit] Examples

{{cite press release
  |publisher=John Doe's Company
  |date=January 1, 1970
  |url=http://www.url.com
  |title=John Doe's Press Release
  |accessdate=1970-01-01
 }}

{{cite press release
  |publisher=John Doe's Company
  |date=January 1, 1970
  |url=http://www.url.com/example.pdf
  |format=PDF
  |title=John Doe's Press Release
 }}

{{cite press release
  |date=January 1, 1970
  |title=John Doe's Press Release
 }}

[edit] Template:Press release reference migration

{{Press release reference
 |Organization=John Doe's Company
 |Date=January 1, 1970
 |URL=http://www.url.com
 |Title=John Doe's Press Release
}}

{{cite press release
 |publisher=John Doe's Company
 |date=January 1, 1970
 |url=http://www.url.com
 |title=John Doe's Press Release
 |accessdate=1970-01-01
}}

More examples may be found on the Migration test subpage.

[edit] Migration status

Migration using AutoWikiBrowser and migrate to cite press release completed (at 22:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)).

Deprecation tags have been added to Template:Press release reference. 22:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

With other citation templates, a URL link is generally presumed to be to an html web page, but to warn the user if another format is used (e.g. PDF, Microsoft Word .doc format etc) an optional parameter of format is provided (see Template:cite journal as an example) - anyone object to allowing this additional template markup here ? David Ruben ^Talk 11:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

sure, I could have sworn it was there already... Circeus 15:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

OK so done - let me know if my coding skills have gone awry and fails to work as it should David Ruben ^Talk 16:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Language

Can someone add language option to this template? —Jared Hunt October 6, 2006, 11:56 (UTC)

I second this request. I'd do it if I understood templates. — coelacan talk — 20:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I figured it out. Done now. — coelacan talk — 21:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Usage for company letters to selected members of the public

Sometimes companies send letters to customers or to members of a community affected by a company action. Such letters often do not appear on-line in their original form. Would this template be suitable for referrring to such original sources? User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 21:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the intent of citation is to allow an arbitrary reader to verify claims made him or herself. One may find books and archived news publications at a library, so it is worthwhile to include citations of them in a Wikipedia article, even if the article or book is not available online. But if a letter is not available to the general public, I would question its value as a source in a Wikipedia article. Remember that Wikipedia is not intended as a place for original reporting. -Pete 23:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quote

This needs the "quote" field as well. — coelacan talk — 20:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I figured it out. Done now. — coelacan talk — 21:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date format

Shoudn't the date be after the title like in the other citation templates? It would sure look better stacked next to the other citations... Anyone have any objections to this (for a reason)?

Timmmy! 01:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Template:cite journal places the date bewtween author and the title (yet most biomedical journals whould order as Author, Tital, Year, issue, :-) ) David Ruben ^Talk 03:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, its pretty obvious. But why is it like that when even you say most citations use the format used by the other citation templates (news, journal, etc). Is there any reason this template should not be that way? If there is no valid reason, I propose changing all the templates in the purposes of comity. If the neccessary changes are not made, I will have no other choice but to fork the template(s) and continue from there. Timmmy! 17:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not beholden to external organisations or policies as to how it sees fit to do things. I think in part the choice of Author/date/title-etc was chosen as this is not so dissimilar from Harvard referencing which has this sequence. So by all means make the suggestion and lets see what others think. but not sure what you mean by forking - having 2 versions of things within wikipedia is not the accepted practice... David Ruben ^Talk 03:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I came here to ask the same question as Timmmy: Why is the date first in this template, when it is later in the more commonly used {{cite web}} and {{cite news}}? Can it be changed to be the same? --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] date wikilinks

I'm puzzled - this page says that "accessdate" should not be wikilinked, but that "date" may be. But this does not appear to be at the discretion of the user of the template, and in fact the way it works appears to be opposite what is recommended. Can/should that be fixed? I've seen this problem on the news and web citation templates as well. -Pete 23:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It means the template will add the wikilink to accessdate to provide formatting, so the editor calling the template must not wikilink it. The template does not do anything special with the date parameter, so it is at the article editor's discretion to wikilink it if required. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On-line forums run by companies/organizations

There are cases where companies or organizations use on-line forums as vehicles for the distribution of official news. Consider for instance the link http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=49553 to a forum entry at the Internet Archive where the top item in the forum was composed by the founder of the organization and which content constitutes an official statement on behalf of the company. What is the thinking around considering such items as de facto press releases? --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to News release

Is there any particular reason for this wikilink in the template? I'd like to propose removing it, since it majorly clogs up the Special:Whatlinkshere of News release, and doesn't seem to add much to the articles it's in. (WP:RS#Self-published sources might be a good target for the link instead, except that we want to avoid self-references in article space, I guess). Thoughts? cab 06:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be preferable to just have it be a non-link. In fact, I think it's a little confusing for it to be a link - at first glance, it seems like it would be a link to the release itself. -Pete 21:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vertical format

Could we put the vertical format of the template, along with the description of the different variables, on the main template page, similar to {{Cite news}} and {{Cite web}}? That would be quite helpful. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Small (spacing)

On Wrexham, Shropshire and Marylebone Railway#References, the first ref is slightly out of alignment. I thought it was just the spacing so i changed that and it did nothing. Do you think this is insignificant? Simply south 00:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Please review article first.

Oops, i just discovered how to fix the error on the article and corrected it there. Simply south 15:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PR distribution services

PR Newswire, Business Wire, etc. are publishers and distribution services for press releases. I believe they also sometimes author or edit the releases they publish. Should they be acknowledged somehow when it's their URL being referenced? If so, how? The examples show the "publisher" as only the originating organization, which IMHO is more akin to an author than a publisher. —mjb 03:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic date wikilinking

Resolved.

—Random832 01:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

I would like it if this template automatically wikilinked the date parameter if it is in ISO format (for example, 2007-11-27). This has already been done on Template:cite web without any complaints (see the discussion at Template talk:Cite web#Automatic date wikilinking), so I think it's safe to go ahead and tweak this template too.

Please change

    | ({{{date}}}).

to

    | ({{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d|{{{date}}}}}|{{{date}}}|[[{{{date}}}]]|{{{date}}}}}).

Thanks in advance! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Title being mis-italicized

The template automatically puts titles in italics. But press-release titles aren't in italics -- they're in quote marks, like magazine articles and newspaper articles. Could an admin please fix this, since the template page is protected? --24.215.162.198 (talk) 15:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, when I see press releases cited in books, they say upfront that's a press release: John Doe Corp. press release, "First Quarter Profits Up". July 1, 2010." --24.215.162.198 (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Good point. Let's change:

  }}''{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    | [{{{url}}}
  }} {{{title}}}{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    |]
  }}''{{#if: {{{format|}}}

to

  }}"{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    | [{{{url}}}
  }} {{{title}}}{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    |]
  }}"{{#if: {{{format|}}}

—Remember the dot ^(talk) 02:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Y Italics to " " changed - 2nd item should have a bit more consensus before changing. SkierRMH (talk) 17:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

I noticed a bug in this, sorry for not catching it earlier. The first quotation mark is showing up in the wrong place. For example:

Opera Software (2006-02-15)." Giving gamers two windows to the Web: The Opera Browser for Nintendo DS™". Press release. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.

Please change

  }}"{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    | [{{{url}}}
  }} {{{title}}}{{#if: {{{url|}}}

to

  }} "{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    |[{{{url}}}
  }}{{{title}}}{{#if: {{{url|}}}

I've tested this change and it should resolve the problem. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 20:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Y Done Gimmetrow 05:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The first word of the title of the press release is being dropped now, when the title is an external link; see the examples above - Foetusized (talk) 04:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Again, I'm sorry for the bug. This should fix the issue for good:

    |{{#if: {{{publisher|}}}|. |}}
  }} "{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    |[{{{url}}}
  }}{{{title}}}{{#if: {{{url|}}}
    |]
  }}"{{#if: {{{format|}}}
  |  ({{{format}}})

needs to be

    |{{#if: {{{publisher|}}}|. |}}
  }} "{{#if: {{{url|}}}|[{{{url}}} {{{title}}}]|{{{title}}} }}"{{#if: {{{format|}}}
  |  ({{{format}}})

—Remember the dot ^(talk) 07:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Y Done. Hopefully third time's the charm. Gimmetrow 10:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor bug in web page for this template itself

This is just a minor thing, but Template:Cite press release (i.e., the web page for this template itself) starts off "Error on call to Template:cite press release: Parameter title must be specified". It is a bit disconcerting for someone who's just trying to read the documentation to see an error message right off the bat; can you please fix this? Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Will an admin please make the following two changes to implement the above request:

1) Change line 1 from

{{#if: {{{title|}}}

to

<includeonly>{{#if: {{{title|}}}

2) Change line 17 from

}}<noinclude>

to

}}</includeonly><noinclude>

Thanks! RossPatterson (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Archive Function

Is it possible to add an archive functions like in {{cite web}}. Specifically, I am looking for the the function of |archiveurl= and |archivedate=. Currently, if you link to a press release on a web page it is possible for the page to move and the link to be lost. If this function can be enabled it would be possible to keep links to archived copies of the press release even after the webpage moved. I am having to use {{cite web}} to cite press releases if I want to keep archived version.

Thanks, Ctempleton3 (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I went here to ask exactly the same! Now that I think of it by the way, what is the advantage of using this template in the first place, when cite_web and cite_press_release are doing almost exactly the same thing, with the latter one only having lesser possibilities? Cheers, Face 19:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hide the access date

We have a consensus that access dates for online copies of offline sources, while helpful as a comment in the source, should be hidden from the reader. Could somebody who is competent to adapt the citation templates please do so? The idea is to keep the access date as a template parameter but remove the code that displays it. Thanks, --EnOreg (talk) 09:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} All it takes is to comment out this code:

 {{#if: {{{accessdate|}}}
   | Retrieved on [[{{{accessdate}}}]].
 }}

--EnOreg (talk) 11:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

(turning off editprotect for now) I have to strongly disagree with this request. Many press releases are made strictly online these days, and if accessdate is not available, then the citation is incomplete. The consensus that was derived can only really apply to citation templates that have no possible online-only source. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with this objection if there were no date given at all. What does accessdate provide to the reader that isn't already provided by the date parameter?--EnOreg (talk) 11:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The date the online release was accessed on? Useful in case the link ever dies, which is really the whole point of the field...so that should the website ever change or go away, a record of exactly when the link was last known to be valid is preserved and visible. Really, only Cite book, Cite paper, and maybe Cite journal and Cite conference should have this implimented. Any other template is simply too divided between print and online-only. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What you describe is the accessdate parameter. In addition to that, the template has a date parameter that holds the publication date of the press release. This latter date is of course relevant for the reader. The accessdate, in contrast, is only relevant for an editor recovering a dead link. That's why I think we should keep it in the page source but hide it from the reader. --EnOreg (talk) 13:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Not at all, they both serve a distinct purpose. Date is the publication date, accessdate is when it was accessed. It is also relevant to the reader, if they too need to recover a dead link (at web.archive.org for example). One of my concerns in this is that if accessdate is hidden to readers, this will eventually bleed over into editors not filling it out, thus removing it from the equation entirely. I'm sorry, I just don't see why "Accessed on" is such an eyesore that it can't be displayed. I gotta sleep now! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)