This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
The paper [1] is available for free in pdf format at [2] via an "author-access-token" as part of the Springer Nature Sharedit. That is, you can't get to the free pdf via the normal Nature url, but you can get directly to it via the sharedit link, which Springer says can be "posted anywhere". It seems to me we'd like to include both the regular Nature link and the sharedit link as part of a cite, but I don't see any clean way to do that now. Am I missing something, or should we add this somehow to the cite journal template? ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 21:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
|doi=10.1038/nature20101
and |url=
http://...
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)I tried to use |url-access= for
I have submitted OAbot for approval. Feel free to comment! This builds on the access signaling features we have been working on here. − Pintoch ( talk) 20:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
This morning I saw several |url=
links that seemed to be prohibited
WP:COPYLINKs. A typical occurrence is somebody teaches a college class and publishes several copyrighted journal articles on the school's website. The copies were never intended for public distribution, but well-meaning editors find them and insert them in WP articles.
How about a parameter that is not displayed that provides a justification for the URL link (e.g., |url-just=
)? There might be an enumerated list of values that include author's website, publisher's website, snippet view, public domain, authorized, and unknown.
Here's an example of a website that claims to have permission to republish an IEEE article:
The parameter could be used to check for copylink violations. For example, find journal citations published by ACM that have a URL that does not point to ACM's website. Require those citations to have a copyright justification (such as author controlled website). Glrx ( talk) 20:37, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
It's unclear to me what the best cite template is for official government regulations. The only two that seem to be possibilities are {{
Cite report}} and {{
Cite techreport}}. The CS1 documentation says that the former is to be used for "unpublished reports by government departments" and the later for "technical reports". And cite techreport doesn't seem specific enough. Well, government regulations are published (by the government itself) so cite report isn't right. Often these are available through an government website like the American Government Printing Office's. Of course, {{
Cite web}} could be used in that case but this actually ends up occuring a lot of the information behind the source (publisher for cite web is supposed to be the website, so |publisher=
becomes the GPO rather than the office that actually published the document. So it seems that using cite web is not an ideal solution. What cite template would people use for government regulations (I have the American Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm regulations in mind). Do you think there's a need for a {{
cite regulation}}?
Jason Quinn (
talk) 07:19, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
{{cite web |website=Electronic Code of Federal regulations |publisher=United States Government |title=Title 27 → Chapter I → Subchapter A → Part 20 → Subpart B → §20.11 Meaning of terms |url=http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d934011bc5835ac395beb59c7ab188f1&mc=true&node=se27.1.20_111&rgn=div8}}
|publisher=
and this can be added: |via=GPO
. The specific template used should depend on the publication: if it is book form/length I would use {{
cite book}}; if it is audio or video I would use {{
cite AV media}}; if it is a technical document {{
cite techreport}}; and so on.
72.43.99.138 (
talk) 14:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Now I get that in a sense, it makes sense to disable a link if it doesn't work:
{{cite journal |author=Smith, J. |year=2006 |title=Article of Things |url=http://example.com |journal=Journal of Important Stuff |volume=5 |issue=2 |page=23 |doi=10.1023/123456 |doi-broken-date=2016-10-20}}
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of October 2016 (
link)However, NOT having the link makes it really annoying to verify if the DOI is still inactive (many of those flaggings are done by Citation bot when the doi resolver is down or is having some hiccups. And this is very inconsistent with how we treat dead urls, where we keep the link, but don't even flag them!
{{cite journal |author=Smith, J. |year=2006 |title=Article of Things |url=http://example.com |journal=Journal of Important Stuff |volume=5 |issue=2 |page=23 |doi=10.1023/123456 |dead-url=yes}}
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)What we should really have is something like
With |dead-url=
changed to support dates, with the templates invoking {{
dead link}} and {{
dead doi}} (which would need to be created) and passing the date to those templates so they can populate the relevant cleanup categories. Or implement some equivalent function.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 15:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
@ Trappist the monk: Any feedback here? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 09:57, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
{{
dead link}}
to the rendered citation's title (or any other externally linked title).|doi=
when |doi-broken-date=
is set. I don't know why the decision was made to unlink 'dead' dois. Before any attempt to overturn that decision is made, some research needs to be undertaken. This is not the forum for discussing the failings or shortcomings of citation bot.|dead-url=
, first on the list should be its name. All other parameters that end in -url
are url-holding parameters. It's that consistency thing again.There are currently
quite a few pages where a CiteSeerX link is input in a citation template using |id={{
citeseerx}}
.
Once the new CS1 has been deployed, I wonder whether it would be appropriate to transfer all these occurrences to |citeseerx=
, with the obvious substitution:
|id = {{citeseerx|([0-9.]*)}}
-> |citeseerx=$1
This might generate a few CS1 errors, because {{ citeseerx}} does not perform any validation, whereas CS1 does. What do you think? − Pintoch ( talk) 18:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
\| *id *= *\{\{ *[Cc]ite[Ss]eer[Xx] *\| *([0-9\.]*) *\}\}
{{
citeseerx}}
template because, sometimes, editors include them; curly braces have meaning to regex so they are escaped; similarly the dot in the identifier's valid character set; there is a {{CiteSeerX}}
redirect so sets in the template name match that.I have read at
Template:Citation § COinS that one should not include HTML or wiki markup in cite templates, such as {{
cite book}}, as these contaminate the
COinS metadata embedded in Wikipedia pages. That includes everything: ''x''
for italics and
for non-breaking spaces.
I searched this archive and found several threads on this topic.
It seems that there are exceptions and that the COinS extraction code is somewhat intelligent. I am particularly interested in "CO2" in titles. It seems clumsy to have to revert to "CO2". To record CO2 in a title, can one use CO<sub>2</sub>
or {{co2}}
? Surely the HTML tags will be stripped out before creating the metadata? What happens with {{
co2}}? Or should one prioritize typesetting in a Wikipedia article (and use such markup) over the COinS metadata (which perhaps wants only clean text)? Any guidance would be helpful. Best wishes.
RobbieIanMorrison (
talk) 20:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
|title=
and other title-holding parameters has been on my todo list for a while. Until recent
changes to MediaWiki broke it, the module did a fair job of stripping <math>...</math>
markup from titles for use in the metadata. Now, those metadata with equations in their titles may have a recognizable equation or they may have a stripmarker, which to those who consume citations via the metadata is completely meaningless. The module has, for quite awhile, stripped off standard bold and italic apostrophe markup from |title=
, |script-title=
, |chapter=
, and |script-chapter=
(and aliases) so that the markup causes correctly rendered titles but the metatdata are not contaminated.|title-coins=
parameter which contains the text version of the title — this then transfers the responsibility for creating a COinS title to the article editor — and seems particularly appropriate for titles containing mathematicsThe long-term solution to this issue is a large-scale bibliographic database spanning all Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. It is called WikiCite. Please see:
Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison ( talk) 07:23, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I naively attempted to copy across {{
cite thesis}}
to Wikimedia Commons, but there seem to be some lua modules missing over there. Could someone versed in these things copy them across? Main discussion at
Village pump (technical).
Thanks!
T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)
talk 23:45, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Currently, a citation with an embargo'd PMC, such as
{{cite journal|title=Title|author=Author|PMC=12345|embargo=May 1, 3000|PMID=123456|work=Journal|date=2006}}
displays as
which changes to
{{
cite journal}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help); Unknown parameter |embargo=
ignored (|pmc-embargo-date=
suggested) (
help)after the embargo period. However, disabling the link is really annoying, as you can't (easily) verify that the PMC version is actually still embargoed.
How about we instead do this?
Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |embargo=
ignored (|pmc-embargo-date=
suggested) (
help)Example:
Mughal, Muhammad Aurang Zeb (18 June 2014). "Calendars Tell History: Social Rhythm and Social Change in Rural Pakistan". History and Anthropology. 25 (5): 592–613. {{
cite journal}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Unknown parameter |lay-summary=
ignored (
help)
It's still a URL to which an access-date applies. And as previously discussed many times, we should never suppress display of that value anyway, even in absence of a URL, since in a WP context is means more than "date that the text I cited said what I claim it did, even if it has since changed"; it means (possibly more importantly) "datestamp of an editor actually stating in good faith that they did the work to verify this citation." — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|lay-summary=
is a url (it's also a doi link so why not use |doi=
?). But, |url=
is not present and the error message specifically states that the |access-date=
parameter requires the |url=
parameter. This has been the definition of the error message since the introduction of the
error message code.we should never suppress display of that value? I do not recall seeing them.
I find it a little bizarre that dates before 100 are not supported, as one who frequently uses early literature.-- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 11:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|date=
to hold the publication date of the 'modern' source you actually read. You may include the date of the 'original', if that date is known, in |orig-year=
.{{
cite press release}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)See
Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:02, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
After url-access=limited
was added to refs within
Grace VanderWaal—specifically, nos. 14 and 22—the titles of the articles no longer line-break in conformity with the columns. In fact, it forces the entire title onto its own line of text. —
ATS 🖖
talk 21:22, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
There is a warning message that appears in {cite interview}, where "program=" is identified as a deprecated parameter. Surely this is an error, as it is a key to identifying a broadcast/webcast source. Raellerby ( talk) 14:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Diptanshu.D has brought an interesting doi server alternative to my attention that I thought I'd recommend here as a replacement for our current server
http://doi.org. If an article is not gold OA, it finds an
alternative green OA to link to in stead. Implementing it would simply be a case of switching from http://doi.org/{{{doi}}}
→ http://oadoi.org/{{{doi}}}
.
What do people reckon? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo) talk 02:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|url=
, |arxiv=
, |pmc=
, |hdl=
…). It is much more useful to let users pick from Wikipedia which link they want to be taken to, instead of letting the DOI resolver choose for them.|auto-url=oadoi
or |oadoi=yes
or similar that would keep things simple.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 10:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Editors can always directly link to whatever they'd like by placing that link in |url=
. No need to add a new oadoi.org identifier especially when, as it appears to me, it is not reliable. The example on their
about page returns a blank page for me (the source for that blank page is full of jibberish so something is there but just what that is, I do not know).
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I've started building Template:Identifier. The idea would be that all identifier templates invoke {{ identifier}} (or maybe some LUA module), and we can have a meta template/module for all identifier templates like {{ arxiv}}, {{ bibcode}}, {{ doi}}. The meta template would need to support
Help designing/coding this would be appreciated. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
With the recent setting of |city=
to deprecated in the module, I've discovered a large number of cases where |city=
is used outside {{
cite interview}} (and particularly in {{
cite episode}}, where I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense, since it must mean the DevelopmentLocation and not the PublishingLocation). I don't think it's a problem if we deprecate this parameter outside cite interview as well in favor of |location=
, but just wanted to see if anyone else disagrees. --
Izno (
talk) 12:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|location=
instead is straightforward and not a big task. I also checked {{
cite book}} and {{
cite web}} and found far fewer instances. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 13:02, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|location=
instead of |city=
, and on the way, I have found once again that insource searches do not return all results.
Here's what should be a subset of a search for all uses of city= within cite templates, but it actually finds more (300+ articles) than
a more expansive search does (9 articles). This is a tracked bug,
T106685. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 12:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
|city=
with |location=
in any and all cs1|2 templates. That task 'fixed' 700ish articles. The job queue is still adding new pages to the category.There is a significant amount of people who seem to not want to see the access locks. While removing the locks isn't really an option, we should at least provide a way to suppress their display via user preferences. What would we need to do to make that happen? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:49, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
I am Pascal Martin from Linterweb, our Wikiwix service archived since 2008 more than 100 million Francophones and Anglophones source links on Wikipedia. Our system is based on a detection of real-time links on Wikipedia and backup the content of external links without compromising the noarchive tag.
Then, I am coming to you to offer you to supply the template Citeweb through our archives, simply by http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/?url=http://www.letelegramme.fr/ig/generales/regions/cotesarmor/coat-an-noz-le-chateau-retrouvera-son-eclat- 01-08-2011-1386817.php
Please, note that I am the manager of a small company, my goal is not to make money with archives but to propose an Alternative to content saveguard and give some big data for the europeen research.
Indeed, since December we will deploy our technology to the entire corpus of the Wikimedia Foundation and in all languages.
We are hosted by the French University Network.
Sincerely, Pascal -- Pmartin ( talk) 18:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Something that kind of always annoyed me is in citations like
{{cite journal |last=Smith |first=J. |year=2014 |title=Article of things |journal=Journal of Stuff |volume=12 |issue=3 |page=4 |arxiv=1201.1234 |doi=10.1234/example |issn=2327-4662 |pmid=102344}}
It displays things like
Seems to me like it would be a lot better to present this as
Opinions? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
{{cite book |last=Smith |first=J. |year=2014 |chapter=Chapter of things |title=Book of Stuff |pages=4 |isbn=123456789X |publisher=Random House|location=New York}}
I expect to update the live cs1|2 modules on the weekend of 29–30 October. Changes since the last update are:
{{
cite interview}}
;
discussion{{cite DVD notes}}
;
TfD discussionTo Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration
|bioarxiv=
;
discussion,
discussion{{cite interview}}
;|citeseerx=
;
discussionTo Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist
{{cite interview}}
;|citeseerx=
;To Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers
|citeseerx=
;|bioarxiv=
;— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
|biorxiv=
error checking|citeseerx=
error checking|biorxiv=
|arXiv=
, |bioRxiv=
, and |CiteSeerX=
without discussion linkAs I read the discussion, there is not a strong consensus for reintroducing mixed case (in this instance, camel case) parameter names. Where is the strong consensus for this change?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
|ARXIV=
and |BIBCODE=
are deprecated. −
Pintoch (
talk) 07:40, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Right now, in citations like
The lock and its corresponding link aren't nowrapped. A line break and occur between them. This should be fixed before deployment if possible. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
<tag style="white-space:nowrap"> </tag>
does not prevent wrapping between the text and the signal icon.I've tweaked external_link()
to use css to keep the access signal with the last word in |title=
. It isn't very pretty, but it works so should not have the browser issues that might be present because of a reader's chosen font.
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)And here is the resulting markup:
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000031-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFLast2016" class="citation book cs1">Last, First (2016). <span class="id-lock-subscription" title="Paid subscription required">[http://www.example.com/ ''a long multi-word title that could split the access signal onto a new line'']</span>. Somewhere: Publisher.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=a+long+multi-word+title+that+could+split+the+access+signal+onto+a+new+line&rft.place=Somewhere&rft.pub=Publisher&rft.date=2016&rft.aulast=Last&rft.aufirst=First&rft_id=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.example.com%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+28" class="Z3988"></span>
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000033-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFLast2016" class="citation journal cs1">Last, First (2016). <span class="id-lock-subscription" title="Paid subscription required">[http://www.example.com/ "a long multi-word title that could split the access signal onto a new line"]</span>. Somewhere: Publisher.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=a+long+multi-word+title+that+could+split+the+access+signal+onto+a+new+line&rft.date=2016&rft.aulast=Last&rft.aufirst=First&rft_id=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.example.com%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+28" class="Z3988"></span> <span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: </span><span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment">Cite journal requires <code class="cs1-code">|journal=</code> ([[Help:CS1 errors#missing_periodical|help]])</span>
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add kerning on italicized urls (e.g. linked journal article titles). The locks bump into them in several browsers.
Add more choices for |jstor-access=
. JSTOR has recently instituted a beta registration program. Several links require registration, not subscription.
|jstor-access=subscription
is currently not allowed, only |jstor-access=free
is. The reason is that some of us consider that identifiers are expected to be "closed" by default and urls are expected to be open by default, so we should only highlight outliers: signaling a restriction on an identifier is considered redundant. So, if |jstor-access=subscription
was currently allowed, it would be uncontroversial to add support for |jstor-access=registration
, but that's not the case. So yeah, the RFC is the right place to suggest this kind of change. −
Pintoch (
talk) 09:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Until recently, cite templates containing |language=bn
produced "(in Bengali)" in their output. Recently (past week or so?) something has changed so that they instead produce "(in Bangla)". In what I assume is a related development, articles such as
2010 South Asian Games now appear in
Category:CS1 Bangla-language sources (bn). Previously such articles would have been in
Category:CS1 Bengali-language sources (bn).
What to call a language can be highly controversial. So before straightening out the categories I would like to know how well-thought-out the change was. I can't figure out where the change took place, so I can't identify who made it or what discussion (if any) it was based on. Would someone more experienced point out where the change was made? -- Worldbruce ( talk) 18:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
{{#language:bn|en}}
mw.language.fetchLanguageName(lang:lower(), this_wiki_code);
lang:lower()
comes from the |language=bn
parameter and this_wiki_code
is the language code for English. It is not clear to me exactly where the change was made because there are at least two and perhaps more lists of language names in MediaWiki's code. Additionally, these lists may or may not use language names and codes that comport with the ISO 639 codes.|language=
expects a language name or an ISO 639-1 or -2 code. Bangla is not the primary name shown for code bn
at the ISO 639 custodian's website. See
here and the ethnologue cite linked from there.language_parameter()
in Module:Citation/CS1 so that bn
returns Bengali and the Bengali category. We have done this before when no
returned Norwegian Bokmål (nb
). If the custodian changes the language name to Bangla, then we should follow that example for language and category names.mw.language.fetchLanguageName()
are maintained as part of the software, although I wasn't able to find exactly where the "Bangla" text is defined. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 07:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
{{#language:}}
uses
mw:Extension:CLDR. It uses
CLDR data for language names.
http://cldr.unicode.org/index/downloads/cldr-30 says bn was changed to {{#language:}}
then they may have to request a revert of the change at CLDR. See
http://cldr.unicode.org/index/bug-reports. English Wikipedia articles are not obligated to follow CLDR. The article can stay at
Bengali language unless there is consensus to move it, but I think it would be messy if templates using {{#language:}}
test for bn
and make another name in that case.
PrimeHunter (
talk) 11:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
target language code
in:
{{#language:bn|target language code}}
target language code
is omitted:
{{#language:bn}}
→ বাংলা (I presume that this translates to what speakers of the language understand as 'Bangla')target language code
is specified, and is not bn
, as here:
{{#language:bn|en}}
→ Bangla (should have returned 'Bengali' as the exonym and as the ISO 639 primary definition)target language code
is not specified, or is set to bn
, then MediaWiki should return the language endonym in that language's writing system. For all other cases, MediaWiki should return the language exonym in the target language's writing system. This should hold true until the ISO 639 standard is changed to make Bangla the primary name for bn
.bn
. Argh! There is a standard. Why can't we use and adhere to the standard? Yeah, rhetorical question.{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=bn}}
|language=Bangla
because, as the endonym, it is the incorrect form for en.wiki. For those who use this module in other-language wikis, it will be necessary for those users to tweak the code to suite their own language:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=Bangla}}
{{cite dictionary |title=Particle |url=http://oed.com/search?searchType=dictionary&q=particle |url-access=subscription |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |edition=3rd |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |date=September 2005}}
produces
There should be a red lock after the url. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite dictionary}}
is a redirect of {{
cite encyclopedia}}
which remaps Title
to Chapter
, URL
to ChapterURL
(among others). The same problem sill occur when using |chapter=
and |chapter-url=
. I guess I wouldn't worry about any of this until the
RfCs run their course.|chapter-url=
have a corresponding |chapter-url-access=
? Because we really should. I agree that we can wait for the RFC to see if we want to add support for |chapter-url-access=free
, but the template should support the current limited/registration/subscription.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 15:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC)I suppose that I should know the answer to this question but I do not. In |location=Cambridge [u.a.]
what is the meaning and purpose of [u.a.]
?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The article Troitsky Administrative Okrug contains cites with links to http://троицкий-округ.рф/ - which is causing {{ cite web}} to complain Check |url= value. Short of encoding the url in punycode (which produces the human-unfriendly http://xn----ftbnafed0afniox8a.xn--p1ai/) is there anything that can be done to suppress or fix the warning in this case? It seems the .рф TLD has been issuing Cyrillic domains since 2010, so we must have come across this issue before. -- Finlay McWalter··–· Talk 11:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
lU+0435gU+0456tU+0456mU+0430tU+0435
) but link to unsuitable hosts.{{
cite web}}
so the change should be made to
Template:Citation Style documentation/url; should provide links to external puny encoders. The text might read:
There may be some CS1 script errors popping up over the next day or two related to {{ PDFlink}}. The template is a wrapper for {{ cite web}} and will be substituted/replaced shortly. These script errors should be temporary, as there are a few instances where the unsubst version has errors not found in the substituted template. Once the substitutions are complete, there should be few if any script errors, but please let me know (either here or on my talk page) so that I can finish cleaning this up. Cheers, Primefac ( talk) 17:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to do that? I'm interested in setting up categories to keep track of articles about sources used by Wikipedia. Is there a way to generate a pinging list for any articles linked in the work= or website= fields by the use of this template on articles? Ranze ( talk) 08:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
|journal=
which is one of the |work=
aliases.See Platyceps najadum which has (Interwiki) links for authors 11 and 15 in the first ref. I determined through experimentation that the same links worked fine if I put them on an author #10 or below, but at their current, correct location, no links display. I also determined that the same symptom shows up for normal (not interwiki) links. -- Floatjon ( talk) 12:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
IUCN2014.2}}
is not strictly a cs1 template but is a wrapper template for {{
IUCN}}
which is a wrapper template for {{
cite web}}
. This problem is not a failing of {{cite web}}
but is a limitation of {{IUCN2014.2}}
and {{IUCN}}
which both only support |author-linkn=
where 1 <= n <= 10. Rewriting the citation strictly as a {{cite web}}
shows that |author-linkn=
where n > 10 does work:
{{cite web |url=http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/157277 |vauthors=Lymberakis P, Ajtic R, Tok V, Ugurtas IH, Sevinç M, ((Crochet P-A)), Mousa Disi AM, Hraoui-Bloquet S, Sadek R, Haxhiu I, Böhme W, Agasyan A, Tuniyev B, Ananjeva N, Orlov N |author-link11=:de:Wolfgang Böhme (Zoologe)| author-link15=:fr:Nikolaï Orlov |date=2009 |title="Platyceps najadum" |work=IUCN Red List of Threatened Species |version=2014.2 |publisher=International Union for Conservation of Nature |access-date=2014-10-14}}
|assessor=
in places of |author=
so that reassignment still needs to be done by the IUCN template.
|last1={{{last1|{{{last|{{{author1|{{{author|{{{assessor1|{{{assessor|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
{{
cite video game}}
something like this should work:{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web | title = {{{title|}}} | author = {{{developer|}}} | publisher = {{{publisher|}}} | date = {{{date|}}} | volume = {{{platform|}}} | issue = {{#if:{{{version|}}}|v{{{version|}}}}} | at = {{#if:{{{scene|}}}|Scene: {{{scene|}}}|}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|{{#if:{{{scene|}}}|. }}Level/area: {{{level|}}}}} | language = {{{language|}}} | quote = {{{quote|}}} }}
The discussion above reminds me of a long-standing question: should we flag |issue=
as unsupported, placing it in the unsupported parameter category, when it is used in {{
cite book}}? I guess the first question is: is it possible to do that in the module without a major rewrite?
The more general question: Should parameters that are valid in some CS1 templates (i.e. on the Whitelist) but not supported by specific CS1 templates:
To put my cards on the table: while it will be a pain to clean up, I think that silently discarding unsupported parameters is ultimately unhelpful to editors who are trying their best to use these complex templates. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 16:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
Cite episode}}, which, according to its documentation "is used to create citations for television or radio programs and episodes"
, gives a red "Missing or empty |series=" warning when no |series=
is provided.
For one-off programmes, the parameter is clearly not required.
I raised this last January, but nothing seems to have changed.
I've also
previously requested the addition of |producer=
and |writer=
- could we have those, please?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 16:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
The paper [1] is available for free in pdf format at [2] via an "author-access-token" as part of the Springer Nature Sharedit. That is, you can't get to the free pdf via the normal Nature url, but you can get directly to it via the sharedit link, which Springer says can be "posted anywhere". It seems to me we'd like to include both the regular Nature link and the sharedit link as part of a cite, but I don't see any clean way to do that now. Am I missing something, or should we add this somehow to the cite journal template? ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 21:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
|doi=10.1038/nature20101
and |url=
http://...
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)I tried to use |url-access= for
I have submitted OAbot for approval. Feel free to comment! This builds on the access signaling features we have been working on here. − Pintoch ( talk) 20:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
This morning I saw several |url=
links that seemed to be prohibited
WP:COPYLINKs. A typical occurrence is somebody teaches a college class and publishes several copyrighted journal articles on the school's website. The copies were never intended for public distribution, but well-meaning editors find them and insert them in WP articles.
How about a parameter that is not displayed that provides a justification for the URL link (e.g., |url-just=
)? There might be an enumerated list of values that include author's website, publisher's website, snippet view, public domain, authorized, and unknown.
Here's an example of a website that claims to have permission to republish an IEEE article:
The parameter could be used to check for copylink violations. For example, find journal citations published by ACM that have a URL that does not point to ACM's website. Require those citations to have a copyright justification (such as author controlled website). Glrx ( talk) 20:37, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
It's unclear to me what the best cite template is for official government regulations. The only two that seem to be possibilities are {{
Cite report}} and {{
Cite techreport}}. The CS1 documentation says that the former is to be used for "unpublished reports by government departments" and the later for "technical reports". And cite techreport doesn't seem specific enough. Well, government regulations are published (by the government itself) so cite report isn't right. Often these are available through an government website like the American Government Printing Office's. Of course, {{
Cite web}} could be used in that case but this actually ends up occuring a lot of the information behind the source (publisher for cite web is supposed to be the website, so |publisher=
becomes the GPO rather than the office that actually published the document. So it seems that using cite web is not an ideal solution. What cite template would people use for government regulations (I have the American Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm regulations in mind). Do you think there's a need for a {{
cite regulation}}?
Jason Quinn (
talk) 07:19, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
{{cite web |website=Electronic Code of Federal regulations |publisher=United States Government |title=Title 27 → Chapter I → Subchapter A → Part 20 → Subpart B → §20.11 Meaning of terms |url=http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d934011bc5835ac395beb59c7ab188f1&mc=true&node=se27.1.20_111&rgn=div8}}
|publisher=
and this can be added: |via=GPO
. The specific template used should depend on the publication: if it is book form/length I would use {{
cite book}}; if it is audio or video I would use {{
cite AV media}}; if it is a technical document {{
cite techreport}}; and so on.
72.43.99.138 (
talk) 14:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Now I get that in a sense, it makes sense to disable a link if it doesn't work:
{{cite journal |author=Smith, J. |year=2006 |title=Article of Things |url=http://example.com |journal=Journal of Important Stuff |volume=5 |issue=2 |page=23 |doi=10.1023/123456 |doi-broken-date=2016-10-20}}
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of October 2016 (
link)However, NOT having the link makes it really annoying to verify if the DOI is still inactive (many of those flaggings are done by Citation bot when the doi resolver is down or is having some hiccups. And this is very inconsistent with how we treat dead urls, where we keep the link, but don't even flag them!
{{cite journal |author=Smith, J. |year=2006 |title=Article of Things |url=http://example.com |journal=Journal of Important Stuff |volume=5 |issue=2 |page=23 |doi=10.1023/123456 |dead-url=yes}}
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)What we should really have is something like
With |dead-url=
changed to support dates, with the templates invoking {{
dead link}} and {{
dead doi}} (which would need to be created) and passing the date to those templates so they can populate the relevant cleanup categories. Or implement some equivalent function.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 15:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
@ Trappist the monk: Any feedback here? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 09:57, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
{{
dead link}}
to the rendered citation's title (or any other externally linked title).|doi=
when |doi-broken-date=
is set. I don't know why the decision was made to unlink 'dead' dois. Before any attempt to overturn that decision is made, some research needs to be undertaken. This is not the forum for discussing the failings or shortcomings of citation bot.|dead-url=
, first on the list should be its name. All other parameters that end in -url
are url-holding parameters. It's that consistency thing again.There are currently
quite a few pages where a CiteSeerX link is input in a citation template using |id={{
citeseerx}}
.
Once the new CS1 has been deployed, I wonder whether it would be appropriate to transfer all these occurrences to |citeseerx=
, with the obvious substitution:
|id = {{citeseerx|([0-9.]*)}}
-> |citeseerx=$1
This might generate a few CS1 errors, because {{ citeseerx}} does not perform any validation, whereas CS1 does. What do you think? − Pintoch ( talk) 18:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
\| *id *= *\{\{ *[Cc]ite[Ss]eer[Xx] *\| *([0-9\.]*) *\}\}
{{
citeseerx}}
template because, sometimes, editors include them; curly braces have meaning to regex so they are escaped; similarly the dot in the identifier's valid character set; there is a {{CiteSeerX}}
redirect so sets in the template name match that.I have read at
Template:Citation § COinS that one should not include HTML or wiki markup in cite templates, such as {{
cite book}}, as these contaminate the
COinS metadata embedded in Wikipedia pages. That includes everything: ''x''
for italics and
for non-breaking spaces.
I searched this archive and found several threads on this topic.
It seems that there are exceptions and that the COinS extraction code is somewhat intelligent. I am particularly interested in "CO2" in titles. It seems clumsy to have to revert to "CO2". To record CO2 in a title, can one use CO<sub>2</sub>
or {{co2}}
? Surely the HTML tags will be stripped out before creating the metadata? What happens with {{
co2}}? Or should one prioritize typesetting in a Wikipedia article (and use such markup) over the COinS metadata (which perhaps wants only clean text)? Any guidance would be helpful. Best wishes.
RobbieIanMorrison (
talk) 20:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
|title=
and other title-holding parameters has been on my todo list for a while. Until recent
changes to MediaWiki broke it, the module did a fair job of stripping <math>...</math>
markup from titles for use in the metadata. Now, those metadata with equations in their titles may have a recognizable equation or they may have a stripmarker, which to those who consume citations via the metadata is completely meaningless. The module has, for quite awhile, stripped off standard bold and italic apostrophe markup from |title=
, |script-title=
, |chapter=
, and |script-chapter=
(and aliases) so that the markup causes correctly rendered titles but the metatdata are not contaminated.|title-coins=
parameter which contains the text version of the title — this then transfers the responsibility for creating a COinS title to the article editor — and seems particularly appropriate for titles containing mathematicsThe long-term solution to this issue is a large-scale bibliographic database spanning all Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. It is called WikiCite. Please see:
Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison ( talk) 07:23, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I naively attempted to copy across {{
cite thesis}}
to Wikimedia Commons, but there seem to be some lua modules missing over there. Could someone versed in these things copy them across? Main discussion at
Village pump (technical).
Thanks!
T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)
talk 23:45, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Currently, a citation with an embargo'd PMC, such as
{{cite journal|title=Title|author=Author|PMC=12345|embargo=May 1, 3000|PMID=123456|work=Journal|date=2006}}
displays as
which changes to
{{
cite journal}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help); Unknown parameter |embargo=
ignored (|pmc-embargo-date=
suggested) (
help)after the embargo period. However, disabling the link is really annoying, as you can't (easily) verify that the PMC version is actually still embargoed.
How about we instead do this?
Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |embargo=
ignored (|pmc-embargo-date=
suggested) (
help)Example:
Mughal, Muhammad Aurang Zeb (18 June 2014). "Calendars Tell History: Social Rhythm and Social Change in Rural Pakistan". History and Anthropology. 25 (5): 592–613. {{
cite journal}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Unknown parameter |lay-summary=
ignored (
help)
It's still a URL to which an access-date applies. And as previously discussed many times, we should never suppress display of that value anyway, even in absence of a URL, since in a WP context is means more than "date that the text I cited said what I claim it did, even if it has since changed"; it means (possibly more importantly) "datestamp of an editor actually stating in good faith that they did the work to verify this citation." — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|lay-summary=
is a url (it's also a doi link so why not use |doi=
?). But, |url=
is not present and the error message specifically states that the |access-date=
parameter requires the |url=
parameter. This has been the definition of the error message since the introduction of the
error message code.we should never suppress display of that value? I do not recall seeing them.
I find it a little bizarre that dates before 100 are not supported, as one who frequently uses early literature.-- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 11:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|date=
to hold the publication date of the 'modern' source you actually read. You may include the date of the 'original', if that date is known, in |orig-year=
.{{
cite press release}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)See
Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:02, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
After url-access=limited
was added to refs within
Grace VanderWaal—specifically, nos. 14 and 22—the titles of the articles no longer line-break in conformity with the columns. In fact, it forces the entire title onto its own line of text. —
ATS 🖖
talk 21:22, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
There is a warning message that appears in {cite interview}, where "program=" is identified as a deprecated parameter. Surely this is an error, as it is a key to identifying a broadcast/webcast source. Raellerby ( talk) 14:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Diptanshu.D has brought an interesting doi server alternative to my attention that I thought I'd recommend here as a replacement for our current server
http://doi.org. If an article is not gold OA, it finds an
alternative green OA to link to in stead. Implementing it would simply be a case of switching from http://doi.org/{{{doi}}}
→ http://oadoi.org/{{{doi}}}
.
What do people reckon? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo) talk 02:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|url=
, |arxiv=
, |pmc=
, |hdl=
…). It is much more useful to let users pick from Wikipedia which link they want to be taken to, instead of letting the DOI resolver choose for them.|auto-url=oadoi
or |oadoi=yes
or similar that would keep things simple.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 10:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Editors can always directly link to whatever they'd like by placing that link in |url=
. No need to add a new oadoi.org identifier especially when, as it appears to me, it is not reliable. The example on their
about page returns a blank page for me (the source for that blank page is full of jibberish so something is there but just what that is, I do not know).
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I've started building Template:Identifier. The idea would be that all identifier templates invoke {{ identifier}} (or maybe some LUA module), and we can have a meta template/module for all identifier templates like {{ arxiv}}, {{ bibcode}}, {{ doi}}. The meta template would need to support
Help designing/coding this would be appreciated. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
With the recent setting of |city=
to deprecated in the module, I've discovered a large number of cases where |city=
is used outside {{
cite interview}} (and particularly in {{
cite episode}}, where I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense, since it must mean the DevelopmentLocation and not the PublishingLocation). I don't think it's a problem if we deprecate this parameter outside cite interview as well in favor of |location=
, but just wanted to see if anyone else disagrees. --
Izno (
talk) 12:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|location=
instead is straightforward and not a big task. I also checked {{
cite book}} and {{
cite web}} and found far fewer instances. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 13:02, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|location=
instead of |city=
, and on the way, I have found once again that insource searches do not return all results.
Here's what should be a subset of a search for all uses of city= within cite templates, but it actually finds more (300+ articles) than
a more expansive search does (9 articles). This is a tracked bug,
T106685. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 12:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
|city=
with |location=
in any and all cs1|2 templates. That task 'fixed' 700ish articles. The job queue is still adding new pages to the category.There is a significant amount of people who seem to not want to see the access locks. While removing the locks isn't really an option, we should at least provide a way to suppress their display via user preferences. What would we need to do to make that happen? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:49, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
I am Pascal Martin from Linterweb, our Wikiwix service archived since 2008 more than 100 million Francophones and Anglophones source links on Wikipedia. Our system is based on a detection of real-time links on Wikipedia and backup the content of external links without compromising the noarchive tag.
Then, I am coming to you to offer you to supply the template Citeweb through our archives, simply by http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/?url=http://www.letelegramme.fr/ig/generales/regions/cotesarmor/coat-an-noz-le-chateau-retrouvera-son-eclat- 01-08-2011-1386817.php
Please, note that I am the manager of a small company, my goal is not to make money with archives but to propose an Alternative to content saveguard and give some big data for the europeen research.
Indeed, since December we will deploy our technology to the entire corpus of the Wikimedia Foundation and in all languages.
We are hosted by the French University Network.
Sincerely, Pascal -- Pmartin ( talk) 18:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Something that kind of always annoyed me is in citations like
{{cite journal |last=Smith |first=J. |year=2014 |title=Article of things |journal=Journal of Stuff |volume=12 |issue=3 |page=4 |arxiv=1201.1234 |doi=10.1234/example |issn=2327-4662 |pmid=102344}}
It displays things like
Seems to me like it would be a lot better to present this as
Opinions? Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
{{cite book |last=Smith |first=J. |year=2014 |chapter=Chapter of things |title=Book of Stuff |pages=4 |isbn=123456789X |publisher=Random House|location=New York}}
I expect to update the live cs1|2 modules on the weekend of 29–30 October. Changes since the last update are:
{{
cite interview}}
;
discussion{{cite DVD notes}}
;
TfD discussionTo Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration
|bioarxiv=
;
discussion,
discussion{{cite interview}}
;|citeseerx=
;
discussionTo Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist
{{cite interview}}
;|citeseerx=
;To Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers
|citeseerx=
;|bioarxiv=
;— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
|biorxiv=
error checking|citeseerx=
error checking|biorxiv=
|arXiv=
, |bioRxiv=
, and |CiteSeerX=
without discussion linkAs I read the discussion, there is not a strong consensus for reintroducing mixed case (in this instance, camel case) parameter names. Where is the strong consensus for this change?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
|ARXIV=
and |BIBCODE=
are deprecated. −
Pintoch (
talk) 07:40, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Right now, in citations like
The lock and its corresponding link aren't nowrapped. A line break and occur between them. This should be fixed before deployment if possible. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
<tag style="white-space:nowrap"> </tag>
does not prevent wrapping between the text and the signal icon.I've tweaked external_link()
to use css to keep the access signal with the last word in |title=
. It isn't very pretty, but it works so should not have the browser issues that might be present because of a reader's chosen font.
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)And here is the resulting markup:
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000031-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFLast2016" class="citation book cs1">Last, First (2016). <span class="id-lock-subscription" title="Paid subscription required">[http://www.example.com/ ''a long multi-word title that could split the access signal onto a new line'']</span>. Somewhere: Publisher.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=a+long+multi-word+title+that+could+split+the+access+signal+onto+a+new+line&rft.place=Somewhere&rft.pub=Publisher&rft.date=2016&rft.aulast=Last&rft.aufirst=First&rft_id=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.example.com%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+28" class="Z3988"></span>
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000033-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFLast2016" class="citation journal cs1">Last, First (2016). <span class="id-lock-subscription" title="Paid subscription required">[http://www.example.com/ "a long multi-word title that could split the access signal onto a new line"]</span>. Somewhere: Publisher.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=a+long+multi-word+title+that+could+split+the+access+signal+onto+a+new+line&rft.date=2016&rft.aulast=Last&rft.aufirst=First&rft_id=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.example.com%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+28" class="Z3988"></span> <span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: </span><span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment">Cite journal requires <code class="cs1-code">|journal=</code> ([[Help:CS1 errors#missing_periodical|help]])</span>
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add kerning on italicized urls (e.g. linked journal article titles). The locks bump into them in several browsers.
Add more choices for |jstor-access=
. JSTOR has recently instituted a beta registration program. Several links require registration, not subscription.
|jstor-access=subscription
is currently not allowed, only |jstor-access=free
is. The reason is that some of us consider that identifiers are expected to be "closed" by default and urls are expected to be open by default, so we should only highlight outliers: signaling a restriction on an identifier is considered redundant. So, if |jstor-access=subscription
was currently allowed, it would be uncontroversial to add support for |jstor-access=registration
, but that's not the case. So yeah, the RFC is the right place to suggest this kind of change. −
Pintoch (
talk) 09:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Until recently, cite templates containing |language=bn
produced "(in Bengali)" in their output. Recently (past week or so?) something has changed so that they instead produce "(in Bangla)". In what I assume is a related development, articles such as
2010 South Asian Games now appear in
Category:CS1 Bangla-language sources (bn). Previously such articles would have been in
Category:CS1 Bengali-language sources (bn).
What to call a language can be highly controversial. So before straightening out the categories I would like to know how well-thought-out the change was. I can't figure out where the change took place, so I can't identify who made it or what discussion (if any) it was based on. Would someone more experienced point out where the change was made? -- Worldbruce ( talk) 18:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
{{#language:bn|en}}
mw.language.fetchLanguageName(lang:lower(), this_wiki_code);
lang:lower()
comes from the |language=bn
parameter and this_wiki_code
is the language code for English. It is not clear to me exactly where the change was made because there are at least two and perhaps more lists of language names in MediaWiki's code. Additionally, these lists may or may not use language names and codes that comport with the ISO 639 codes.|language=
expects a language name or an ISO 639-1 or -2 code. Bangla is not the primary name shown for code bn
at the ISO 639 custodian's website. See
here and the ethnologue cite linked from there.language_parameter()
in Module:Citation/CS1 so that bn
returns Bengali and the Bengali category. We have done this before when no
returned Norwegian Bokmål (nb
). If the custodian changes the language name to Bangla, then we should follow that example for language and category names.mw.language.fetchLanguageName()
are maintained as part of the software, although I wasn't able to find exactly where the "Bangla" text is defined. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 07:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
{{#language:}}
uses
mw:Extension:CLDR. It uses
CLDR data for language names.
http://cldr.unicode.org/index/downloads/cldr-30 says bn was changed to {{#language:}}
then they may have to request a revert of the change at CLDR. See
http://cldr.unicode.org/index/bug-reports. English Wikipedia articles are not obligated to follow CLDR. The article can stay at
Bengali language unless there is consensus to move it, but I think it would be messy if templates using {{#language:}}
test for bn
and make another name in that case.
PrimeHunter (
talk) 11:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
target language code
in:
{{#language:bn|target language code}}
target language code
is omitted:
{{#language:bn}}
→ বাংলা (I presume that this translates to what speakers of the language understand as 'Bangla')target language code
is specified, and is not bn
, as here:
{{#language:bn|en}}
→ Bangla (should have returned 'Bengali' as the exonym and as the ISO 639 primary definition)target language code
is not specified, or is set to bn
, then MediaWiki should return the language endonym in that language's writing system. For all other cases, MediaWiki should return the language exonym in the target language's writing system. This should hold true until the ISO 639 standard is changed to make Bangla the primary name for bn
.bn
. Argh! There is a standard. Why can't we use and adhere to the standard? Yeah, rhetorical question.{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=bn}}
|language=Bangla
because, as the endonym, it is the incorrect form for en.wiki. For those who use this module in other-language wikis, it will be necessary for those users to tweak the code to suite their own language:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=Bangla}}
{{cite dictionary |title=Particle |url=http://oed.com/search?searchType=dictionary&q=particle |url-access=subscription |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |edition=3rd |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |date=September 2005}}
produces
There should be a red lock after the url. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite dictionary}}
is a redirect of {{
cite encyclopedia}}
which remaps Title
to Chapter
, URL
to ChapterURL
(among others). The same problem sill occur when using |chapter=
and |chapter-url=
. I guess I wouldn't worry about any of this until the
RfCs run their course.|chapter-url=
have a corresponding |chapter-url-access=
? Because we really should. I agree that we can wait for the RFC to see if we want to add support for |chapter-url-access=free
, but the template should support the current limited/registration/subscription.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 15:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC)I suppose that I should know the answer to this question but I do not. In |location=Cambridge [u.a.]
what is the meaning and purpose of [u.a.]
?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The article Troitsky Administrative Okrug contains cites with links to http://троицкий-округ.рф/ - which is causing {{ cite web}} to complain Check |url= value. Short of encoding the url in punycode (which produces the human-unfriendly http://xn----ftbnafed0afniox8a.xn--p1ai/) is there anything that can be done to suppress or fix the warning in this case? It seems the .рф TLD has been issuing Cyrillic domains since 2010, so we must have come across this issue before. -- Finlay McWalter··–· Talk 11:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
lU+0435gU+0456tU+0456mU+0430tU+0435
) but link to unsuitable hosts.{{
cite web}}
so the change should be made to
Template:Citation Style documentation/url; should provide links to external puny encoders. The text might read:
There may be some CS1 script errors popping up over the next day or two related to {{ PDFlink}}. The template is a wrapper for {{ cite web}} and will be substituted/replaced shortly. These script errors should be temporary, as there are a few instances where the unsubst version has errors not found in the substituted template. Once the substitutions are complete, there should be few if any script errors, but please let me know (either here or on my talk page) so that I can finish cleaning this up. Cheers, Primefac ( talk) 17:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to do that? I'm interested in setting up categories to keep track of articles about sources used by Wikipedia. Is there a way to generate a pinging list for any articles linked in the work= or website= fields by the use of this template on articles? Ranze ( talk) 08:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
|journal=
which is one of the |work=
aliases.See Platyceps najadum which has (Interwiki) links for authors 11 and 15 in the first ref. I determined through experimentation that the same links worked fine if I put them on an author #10 or below, but at their current, correct location, no links display. I also determined that the same symptom shows up for normal (not interwiki) links. -- Floatjon ( talk) 12:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
IUCN2014.2}}
is not strictly a cs1 template but is a wrapper template for {{
IUCN}}
which is a wrapper template for {{
cite web}}
. This problem is not a failing of {{cite web}}
but is a limitation of {{IUCN2014.2}}
and {{IUCN}}
which both only support |author-linkn=
where 1 <= n <= 10. Rewriting the citation strictly as a {{cite web}}
shows that |author-linkn=
where n > 10 does work:
{{cite web |url=http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/157277 |vauthors=Lymberakis P, Ajtic R, Tok V, Ugurtas IH, Sevinç M, ((Crochet P-A)), Mousa Disi AM, Hraoui-Bloquet S, Sadek R, Haxhiu I, Böhme W, Agasyan A, Tuniyev B, Ananjeva N, Orlov N |author-link11=:de:Wolfgang Böhme (Zoologe)| author-link15=:fr:Nikolaï Orlov |date=2009 |title="Platyceps najadum" |work=IUCN Red List of Threatened Species |version=2014.2 |publisher=International Union for Conservation of Nature |access-date=2014-10-14}}
|assessor=
in places of |author=
so that reassignment still needs to be done by the IUCN template.
|last1={{{last1|{{{last|{{{author1|{{{author|{{{assessor1|{{{assessor|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
{{
cite video game}}
something like this should work:{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web | title = {{{title|}}} | author = {{{developer|}}} | publisher = {{{publisher|}}} | date = {{{date|}}} | volume = {{{platform|}}} | issue = {{#if:{{{version|}}}|v{{{version|}}}}} | at = {{#if:{{{scene|}}}|Scene: {{{scene|}}}|}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|{{#if:{{{scene|}}}|. }}Level/area: {{{level|}}}}} | language = {{{language|}}} | quote = {{{quote|}}} }}
The discussion above reminds me of a long-standing question: should we flag |issue=
as unsupported, placing it in the unsupported parameter category, when it is used in {{
cite book}}? I guess the first question is: is it possible to do that in the module without a major rewrite?
The more general question: Should parameters that are valid in some CS1 templates (i.e. on the Whitelist) but not supported by specific CS1 templates:
To put my cards on the table: while it will be a pain to clean up, I think that silently discarding unsupported parameters is ultimately unhelpful to editors who are trying their best to use these complex templates. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 16:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
Cite episode}}, which, according to its documentation "is used to create citations for television or radio programs and episodes"
, gives a red "Missing or empty |series=" warning when no |series=
is provided.
For one-off programmes, the parameter is clearly not required.
I raised this last January, but nothing seems to have changed.
I've also
previously requested the addition of |producer=
and |writer=
- could we have those, please?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 16:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)