Please neowin start linking sources properly

[1337ish]

I am glad you guys are looking into turning the intelltxt ads green again as that would be so much better.

Regarding the source at the bottom it seems like we are pretty split down the middle (slightly more want the source at the bottom going by those that voiced here) so its maybe a question for a future user poll/survey but certainly turning the links green would help everywhere intellitxt ads are and not just the news articles.

[Steven P. Administrators]

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

Why would we do that if it is our own news, we haven't copy/pasted news from other sites for over two years?

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.

Way to be informed /not.

[DaveLegg Developer]

I am glad you guys are looking into turning the intelltxt ads green again as that would be so much better.

Actually, it turns out I was mistaken about the colour. They should however be double-underlined as before, and it appears this issue is only affecting Chrome users. We're contacting the ad providers about this issue to get the style rectified.

[Bhav]

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...

Whilst I agree with the convenience of just reading the article on the site I'm on, the following is a problem...

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

The quality of writers here is pretty "variable". Sometimes articles are re-written simply because they have to be, and therefore end up being bastardised (e.g. bad grammar, confusing/wrong explanations etc) to the point where I stop reading and would rather just go to the source. Except with the in-line system, I have to go searching for it.

Contrast this with places like Engadget, where I (almost) never need to go to the source. And a bonus is that they often post the original press release (perhaps Neowin should look into that).

I'm not bashing Neowin's writers per say, because I know it's a different environment/style here. But I think it should be aware of its limitations/weaknesses...and one solution is simply to provide the source in a clearer way.

[AltecXP]

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

You can see how much I actually read the front page any more then.

[Bhav]

Why would we do that if it is our own news, we haven't copy/pasted news from other sites for over two years?

Um...seriously?

I take your point if it's original content. But if the author has found the news elsewhere, he/she should say so.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

Two minds on this...

Correctly citing or referencing a source should be done postscript (after the article body) but online, linking within the text is possibly more contextually correct.

[Steven P. Administrators]

Um...seriously?

I take your point if it's original content. But if the author has found the news elsewhere, he/she should say so.

That is why the news is linked within content. If you took a moment to read news from other websites you'll see there is ALWAYS an originating point, for example: https://www.neowin.net/news/bbc-websites-down-worldwide We linked to the BBC website, as it is the origin, not any other site like engadget or gizmodo, because we were among the first to report it.

I won't judge you though if you don't understand this concept.

Two minds on this...

Correctly citing or referencing a source should be done postscript (after the article body) but online, linking within the text is possibly more contextually correct.

It's what the other sites that are being discussed about here do as well.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

I have no personal feeling on this, just providing a little food for discussion :)

[Bhav]

That is why the news is linked within content. If you took a moment to read news from other websites you'll see there is ALWAYS an originating point, for example: https://www.neowin.net/news/bbc-websites-down-worldwide We linked to the BBC website, as it is the origin, not any other site like engadget or gizmodo, because we were among the first to report it.

I won't judge you though if you don't understand this concept.

No absolutely, I do understand that because it was completely original.

I'm just saying that if an author has found some news elsewhere, other than an original press release, then I don't see the big problem in providing that source at the bottom (much like other sites have "via..." at the end).

[Steven P. Administrators]

No absolutely, I do understand that because it was completely original.

I'm just saying that if an author has found some news elsewhere, other than an original press release, then I don't see the big problem in providing that source at the bottom (much like other sites have "via..." at the end).

Usually those sites have directly copied the story (or just part of it) over. Which means you'd provide that sort of link, postscript. We require our guys to research the source (and the tip site) and include that in the story, that's how it works with all of our competitors.

But some site in fact, do place a link in the title bar as the main source of the article, (like ActiveWin for example) we don't, because we've done our own research and probably amended to the original source as well.

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

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.

Just to reiterate what has been mentioned already, we don't post the "source" links like some sites do (e.g. Engadget). Each site has their own way of sourcing, and if people took the time to notice, we mention the source and link back to them. For example, in our latest article: Microsoft updates "NoDo" status, apologizes again, Owen wrote:

In addition to the update, Microsoft even issued another apology over on The Windows Blog about the issues;

Which uses our correct sourcing techniques.

I apologize that we can't please everybody in the way we write, source, include images / videos, but we appreciate your feedback and will make adjustments where necessary. I can't guarantee we will make any drastic changes to our writing, as each writer has his/her own unique style of writing, including variations of words from different countries.

While we're on the topic of sourcing, perhaps you should properly source your signature? Cause HootchieMama (I believe he has changed his name now?) and I created those years ago :p