Please neowin start linking sources properly

[1337ish]

Hi

Its just something I noticed in a lot of news articles that drives me nuts. Please please please start putting source links at the end of the article.

I know you do link sources in the articles text but come on please put "Source: Link" at the bottom as well. Thanks to the use of those awful text ad's by vibrant its very hard to spot the links from the crap it peddles so my mouse automatically avoids all links in the articles now. It drives me that nuts (vibrant) that I have even been tempted to block those ads but I hope common sense here could pre-vale.

At example of poor linking is here: https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-internet-explorer-9s-industry-leading-energy-efficiency

Why did the author not make the Image Source a proper link to the source is beyond me but I cant see any real reason not to if you put the text there anyway.

The cynic may say you want us to put our mouse all over the vibrant links to find the proper link but I wouldnt think neowin would resort to silly tactics like that and this is more an oversight.

An explanation for the policy at least would help if your not going to start linking sources in the usual standard manor as this seems to be the only site I use regularly that doesnt link to sources in the usual (imo proper) way. Hell even people posting in back page etc use this standard approach...

Dont take this too harshy but it really is driving me nuts and I dont want to start blocking ad's as that helps no one.

[+dave164 Subscriber¹]

I agree, sometimes I would just like to see where it was from as opposed to going through all the text wondering which link is the source.

Very easy really :)

[Spyder Veteran]

it used to be that way back in the day IIRC

[bdsams Veteran]

We have been doing in-line source citation for years, the source is clearly stated in the article. You're post also portrays that we just started doing this, for the past two years (or more) we have been using this method and haven't had any complaints until now.

To be honest, one benefit we get, or at least noticed to a slight degree, is that people actually read the news if we use source in-line citation. It sounds odd but if we have a title, and a source at top/bottom, people see title, see source, make judgement without reading the content. It still happens but it did help initially when this other format was adopted.

If you really have a problem with the adverts, you could always purchase a sub2 (cheesy plug i know)

[FiB3R]

Agreed. (with the op)

[1337ish]

We have been doing in-line source citation for years, the source is clearly stated in the article. You're post also portrays that we just started doing this, for the past two years (or more) we have been using this method and haven't had any complaints until now.

To be honest, one benefit we get, or at least noticed to a slight degree, is that people actually read the news if we use source in-line citation. It sounds odd but if we have a title, and a source at top/bottom, people see title, see source, make judgement without reading the content. It still happens but it did help initially when this other format was adopted.

If you really have a problem with the adverts, you could always purchase a sub2 (cheesy plug i know)

Thanks for the reply, I just find it a bit messy since the vibrant ad's match the colour of source links too. I am all for including the links into the article too but I personally read all of the article then sometimes desire to read a bit further into the topic if the news post has been more lightweight then the source and thats when the pain occurs. I will be honest and say the name of the source is clearly stated but I find the actual link to the source unclear due to the vibrant ad's. Maybe if the source was even bolded it may help me spot the link.

I know I could subscribe (which I am considering anyway, down with ad blocks sucking the life out of the net :) ) but I would hazard the assumption most of your user base dont and would likewise find it annoying even though most wont post about it, they may just move on. I am surprised it has not been mentioned before but I didnt take the time to post ages ago when I noticed the trend :)

It was the article today that really forced me to post as I tbh thought it was silly having the text at the bottom without a link.

I know people may just jump to the source and glance your article but is it really the worst thing in the world? You get the hit on the article and the advertising side as well as the fact in the eyes of the reader your reputation has increased anyway as you were the ones that brought the source to their attention.

I am sure you would like other sites to link more clearly to neowin when they take a similar approach to neowin exclusive news as that would drive traffic to you.

As they say spread the love :)

[Jan Veteran]

You could subscribe, or disable the in-line ads.

[what]

You could subscribe, or disable the in-line ads.

Subscribing to make source links more visible?

I lol'd.

[1337ish]

You could subscribe, or disable the in-line ads.

Yep I could and that would solve the issue for me but then neowin wouldnt have my feedback about the approach which I hope they find constructive and useful even if it doesnt result in a change in policy.

If no one takes the time to tell neowin we find it annoying then they will never know ;)

[DaveLegg Developer]

I think the problem has only arisen now as the intellitext links used to be green, and they seem to now have changed to match our inline link colour, I'll poke someone and see if we can find a way to change them back.

[AJerman]

I agree with OP. "Hiding" the links inline is almost a cheap way of not fully crediting the site the article came from. It just seems a bit amateurish to me, which, granted, Neowin is, but still. Consider what you learned in school about citations. A works cited page would be included for easy referral of where the information came from, as a source link should be posted at the bottom. Even when you do in-text citation, you should be a little more obvious that you're getting the information from a certain source other than just a link to that page in the middle of the text.

[bdsams Veteran]

Yep I could and that would solve the issue for me but then neowin wouldnt have my feedback about the approach which I hope they find constructive and useful even if it doesnt result in a change in policy.

If no one takes the time to tell neowin we find it annoying then they will never know ;)

I'd much rather you voice a concern, it's legitimate, but unless we see a massive uprising to move our sources to the bottom and away from inline text, we will probably stay the current course. If someone else links to us, very rarely does that drive traffic to the site in mass volumes, it helps with our pageranks sure, but as for a single link on a website as a source at the bottom, it doesn't bring much to the site in terms of visitors compared to our normal traffic bumps (unless it's reddit/digg/google news).

[Denis W. Veteran]

My impression of the 'Image Credit' text was that it would be linkified to a source if it differed from the story's own sources. Otherwise it remains as static text - that's why I did not put in a link.

One thing I could suggest as a change is that inline sources be bolded to better differentiate what is a link, what is the link to the source, and what is Intellitxt.

[what]

EDIT: misread

[shanghaishowdown]

I agree with the op. Please add sources to the bottom of your news.

[supbroheimdawg]

I also agree.

[SakuraKira]

So... I'm the only person who sees the double lines of an ad-link, even though they are the same color now? I too remember when they were green, but there is still a way to avoid them. It's not completely deceptive.

[edit to add]

No, I don't run any extensions or anything. It's the default for Firefox 4.

[Guest]

I don't know about everyone else but on sites which feature a list of any sources at the bottom of the article, I generally look at the title first, read the first paragraph and if it's interesting enough, the whole article then go to the site which the content originated from.

I'd rather read the content on the site I'm already on, clicking on the source outright is too much hassle and I think there's quite a diverse amount of sources on neowin articles so I can't see how people would judge the content based on the source so quickly...

I think it's fairer to outright list the source url too, feels more honest to me.

[Chasethebase Veteran]

Personally I think it's fine, because then people aren't judgmental, as long as the article refers to its source at some point then that's fine.

[tomwarren Veteran]

I don't agree with the source at the bottom but the intellitxt ads should NOT be the same colour as the article links. Someone has clearly changed that recently to try and get more people to click them...

[DaveLegg Developer]

I don't agree with the source at the bottom but the intellitxt ads should NOT be the same colour as the article links. Someone has clearly changed that recently to try and get more people to click them...

We haven't touched the colours, and we're looking into how to get it changed back.

[Shadrack]

I would prefer to have sources cited at the end of posted news as well. Original content =/= regurgitation from other news sites. Seems like one of these posts asking the staff to go back to how it was in 2008 when sources were listed clearly always get a bunch of folks saying +1, but nothing ever happens so w/e.

[Holey]

If you want to let them know, make an online poetition and ask people to sign it. If enough people do, they'll change it (as he stated above)

If not enough people do, then theres clearly not a huge interest in it.

[AltecXP]

You people read the articles here? I just look for the source link and click and read that instead, it's typically a copy/paste anyway.

[DaveLegg Developer]

You people read the articles here? I just look for the source link and click and read that instead, it's typically a copy/paste anyway.

Actually, we haven't allowed c&p articles on our front page for years now.