Template talk:Stackexchange

While I appreciate that "Stackexchange" is a better term for the template, I would suggest that we take the "MathSE" implementation, for the following reasons:
 * Users can change their username over time
 * The MathSE posts always refers to the state of the post as it was during retrieval (so the reference is not influenced by subsequent edits).

Besides this, it needs to be taken into account that a reference might need to be crafted to a specific *answer* rather than a question. In fact I would say that this is the typical scenario for a reference (at least in the case of a proof). Thoughts? &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2019 (EST)


 * I was duplicating the contents of the "Cite" button in the particular SE post I was providing it for. I'm not concerned about the nature of the template (it's there for legal reasons, basically -- I don't use SE as I can't get any posts approved, so I have no axe to grind). All I do care about is that the template future-proofs us as much as possible.


 * Since we're on the same licence, should we not also request that material sourced from here should likewise have a standard citation style? --prime mover (talk) 17:29, 27 January 2019 (EST)


 * I see. Since it is very common practice to share links within SE using the format that is used in the MathSE template, I think it's quite future-proof. But I agree that the use case for this template is limited at present. It doesn't matter much.


 * On the topic of the citation requests, I can't be bothered. I'd say people should feel free to refer to us in whatever way they want. Where would we have to hide these instructions in the first place? &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 17:45, 27 January 2019 (EST)


 * Good question. It was hard enough finding them on the Stackexchange page. Perhaps on the "Proofwiki:Copyrights page? But I don't see it as that important. --prime mover (talk) 17:53, 27 January 2019 (EST)