Template talk:Cite podcast/Archive 1

URL?
What would be put for the URL? The URL of the actual audio file for the episode in question? the URL for the RSS feed? the URL for the 1-click itunes link to the podcast? Or the URL to the website where the aforementioned links are? TheHYPO 08:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest that would be the discretion of the person making the citation; whichever most clearly points to the actual source. Some podcasts are listenable through a particular Web site; others can be downloaded directy. The RSS Feed and iTunes links would probably be less valuable, as they require additional "software" for access.-- LeflymanTalk 08:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The problem is that most people subscribe to the podcast in itunes and then don't have any reference to access the specific link to the episode audio file. One could go through the RSS code and get the specific URL to the episode audio file, but that's somewhat of a pain, and some people may not want to do that. The fact that there's a date field (perhaps there should be an 'episode' field, since some podcasts could be multiple times a day. The someone could put the date in the episode field for daily podcasts, or for less consistant ones, the episode number can be used... but you'd have to make it an additional field, or else retrofit any citations that exist now using the day field. TheHYPO 09:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how "most people" access podcasts, as I've listened to many of them directly through Web pages; although, I do get them through iTunes, too. And I agree it's a bit of a pain to find the actual source URL, but it's a necessity. The more I think about it, unless the podcast is available exclusively through Apple, using the iTunes pointer rather than the "real" URL, would be a problem: it locks in users to a particular software package, plus if Apple removes the listing from its server or has an error in its pointer, then the reference becomes unusable. It may have been a mistake on Apple's part or an intentional obfuscation to not make the source easy to find. An InfoWorld columnist finds the same annoyance.-- LeflymanTalk 18:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Additional parameters?
Should there be additional parameters, such as "time", i.e. the minutes:seconds within a podcast from which a particular quote/reference is taken?

Anything else that might make a podcast easier/more convenient to cite?

-- LeflymanTalk 09:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. I took a look at this discussion section just to suggest adding a parameter so you could include a specific timespan (or timespans?) in the podcast that you are citing, for cases where you aren't citing the whole podcast.  I would find that very useful, and it appears that I'm not the only one who wants to add that functionality.  What do we need to do before we can make that addition to the template? -- HiEv 17:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree this would be a good idea. Even the ability to put a time range, say 1hr 10min to 1hr 20min, for a segment about the relevant info. - Waza 06:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

accessdate
Please make  handling compatible with cite book etc.—  should be   with    and    as alternatives. —xyzzyn 01:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Archived broadcasts can use cite audio/cite video
I was going to ask if this would be an appropriate template to use for archived radio programs, such as those found on npr.org, which aren't accessible as "podcasts", per se. After doing some more searching, I decided cite audio, an alias for cite video, would be the better option. I'm just mentioning it here for the benefit of others. —mjb 02:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm.. cite episode says it should be used for radio progammes. Just another inconsistency between templates, I'm sure! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge?
Should this be merged into the (more complete) Cite video? CharlesGillingham (talk) 13:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I realize that this is an old discussion, but I would say yes. It lacks a "format" (M4A, MP3, etc) or "time" function, which are both useful for proper access and verification of an audio source. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Does currency matter?
My query might belong elsewhere (eg in discussions about WP:VERIFIABILITY or suchlike, but I'll put it here anyway. I was intending to use this excellent template in a few existing articles relating to radio programs broadcast by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Unlike those of many NPR programs, the Corporation's podcasts are not archived. Podcasts of programs broadcast daily are available for downloading, at most for 2 weeks, while those from weekly programs might be available for 4 or 5 weeks. Assuming that the main function of the CITE PODCAST template (as with citations generally) is for the purpose of verifiability, if I used the template to cite a particular podcast, knowing that it would not be available (ie the url would be a deadlink) after a few weeks, would it be defeating the purpose of using the template in ther first place, or would the fact that the podcast did exist (albeit for a short time) be enough to validate the citation? GlenDillon 15:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It simply needs changing so that  is not a required part of the reference. The fact that it exists is enough to validate. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

New field for template
Currently, only  is being used. Is this supposed to represent the title of the actual podcast, or of the series of the podcast? cite episode uses both, and I think this one should too. I come across many podcasts with their own individual title which is part of a series of podcasts, and this template is currently useless for utilizing them.

Additionally, as mentioned above, podcasts often are taken offline after a certain period. Making the URL a required part of the template ensures that the External Link Checker tool will bring back results of deadlinks. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Why are the date and year on separate lines?
This is the only template I've seen that splits the year off from the month and day. This split causes AWB to read an error in the accessdate field, prompting a change to an incorrect date. c.f. Ben Harvey and Dave Rubin, which each cite a podcast from 11-08-2007. Because "11-08" is on a separate line, AWB changes it to "2008-01-01". Can the accessyear line be eliminated and the accessdate used for the complete YYYY-MM-DD? Otto4711 (talk) 20:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed, accessyear is deprecated on all the other templates.

date field
The date field does not appear to affect the template output. Please change the template so that the date appears in the output. Thank you. Lagrange613 (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Update to citation/core
Cite podcast/sandbox has been updated to use citation/core, making this template compatible with Help:Citation Style 1 and adding these features:


 * ref to work with Harvard templates
 * last and first
 * month and year; using date for a year only breaks the anchor when harv
 * IDs such as OCLC, BIBCODE and the like
 * series
 * trans_title
 * type, defaulting to Podcast
 * time

Current

Sandbox

---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 01:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC)