This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Major works says "Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features. Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized." I'm of the opinion that sites like Daytime Confidential and Soapcentral are indeed "news sites with original content", and that their names should be italicized like other major works. There has been a lengthy discussion about website name formatting in citations at Help talk:Citation Style 1 that has informed me a bit more on the topic. I understand that within soap opera-related articles, formatting has been inconsistent but mostly seems to favor not italicizing these sites. I don't know that this has ever really been discussed, but rather has propagated itself by imitation as we improve articles.— TAnthonyTalk 15:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
For me, it seems that sites like
Soaps in Depth, they aren't exclusively news-produced. There are a lot of inconsistencies within soap opera-related articles, more so beyond stylization of title of works, etc. livelikemusicmy talk page! 16:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Haha yes, this is the least of our problems with soap articles ;) But I'm interested in how you think Soapcentral is different that Soap Opera Digest (except that SOD has a print version)? The fact, for example, that SC has more recap material is no surprise because the web has all the space in the world, which a magazine obviously doesn't. And the SOD site has never really been interchangeable with the print edition (or gone beyond it in content) as most mainstream magazine sites now are.— TAnthonyTalk 16:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for the longest of times (at one point), Soapcentral.com was believed to be
unreliable, though that has been rectified. I just fail to hold Soapcentral.com and Daytime Confidential on the same content-level as SOD or SID, etc. Perhaps it is because they both have print editions that are purchasable. livelikemusicmy talk page! 17:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes both were originally basically fansites, but on their current merits you can't deem them inferior because they are web only, there are many reputable news sites which have risen as paper publishing has declined. As a matter of fact I would suggest that these sites are more valuable/vital if only because they can report things more quickly and comprehensively than SOD and SID can. — TAnthonyTalk 18:11, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
