Template talk:DailyRef

Should the domain now be changed to `archive.wizards.com`? These citations now all 404. Yizumi (talk) 12:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

It all works fine here. For the first few days of the new site, old links were broken, but they are now being redirected to archive.wizards.com by the website itself. AlmaV (talk) 13:09, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

*important!* template needs updated - done! Now linkies need updated!

Old linkies no longer redirect. The newer format is http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/* e.g.

• http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/symbol-urza-2007-12-03 instead of http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/arcana/1473
• http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/day-cards-tapped-backwards-2008-04-11 instead of http://magic.wizards.com/go/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/dl32

Simple substitutions do not work. So in addition to needing to edit the template, we *also* need to manually fix every link -_-. Fortunately, the archive seems to have been crawled pretty well, so fixing each link is just a simple matter of googling them whenever one comes across a still-dead one (or going crazy with http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Category:Articles_with_dead_external_links but a more distributed as-viewed manner might work better to hit the most important ones). I can try to fix the template, but wiki-templates aren't something I've worked on before, so I'd prefer if someone experienced took up the mantle instead. The drudgery of updating linkies once the template is fixed; yeah, that I help out with for sure. Anaphysik (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

• • Okay, so fixing it was actually trivial. I'll go ahead and update the readme to explain the new template format. Anaphysik (talk) 13:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • The new linky method is simply to list the entire part of the url after "magic.wizards.com/". This might be clunkier than it needs to be, but with Arcana archives seeming to use a different format (en/section/ rather than en/articles/archive/), it's necessary :/. At that point, it's easier just including the en/ as well, both to make selecting simpler and of course in case we need to link to a non-English-language article. Anyway, now the linkies themselves need to be manually updated... Well, at least we're no longer *permanently* consigned to dead links everywhere - just temporarily consigned. Anaphysik (talk) 14:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Hrmmm, of course, the dead link template was left as just a part of this template, which is how the dead-link'd pages got 'catalogued' (obviously not really). That means it won't be obvious at all which pages have been fixed as we (well, hopefully that'll be a 'we') go through them. Not sure how to deal with that. Probably going to leave it in the template for now, just to have a handy list of all the pages that need to be inspected. Alphabetically might be a better option in this case then. Anaphysik (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

your "fix" does not change it, that the links are dead-links. thats why we have Template:Template for which is better than this template. --Hanmac (talk) 15:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

• Alright then; I didn't know about NewRef at the time (though I did just moments ago see it used for 1 of about 25-or-so links on the Planeswalker page - though that just shows how unused it is). The vast majority of pages seem to still use DailyRef, as well as the old (broken) url stubs. I see that you already modified my page edits to use NewRef (instead of simply reverting, phew); thank you for that! Frankly, I'm glad to hear of NewRef, as it sidesteps the deadlink-cataloguing issue. We still need to manually edit (almost) all of the references, but NewRef template it is. (I guess arguably my edit to this still has some use, given that it's just a generalized NewRef, and Arcana seems to require a more generalized url-start? I dunno. It can probably be reverted.) Anaphysik (talk) 15:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • ("and Arcana seems to require a more generalized url-start?" Sorry, I meant the Ask Wizards archive.) Anaphysik (talk) 15:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I am not sure if I like the change. Because now the template essentially does the same as Template:NewRef. I would like to revert it to its old form and the link updated should be done with a switch from DailyRef -> NewRef. The dead link categorization was very helpful because you could see which pages still needed updating. - Yandere Sliver 16:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)