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 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
In using cite book here, I find I'm getting an error for specifying a page and the pages in the book.
More than one of |pages=, |at=, and |page= specified (help)
Since I recall a long ago class in citation specifications which suggested including a page count and specific pages in citing a book, that memory indicates I certainly shouldn't be seeing an error.
SPECIFICALLY:
Lewis Mumford (1934). "Chapter II:" 4: The Primitive Engineer (sectioned). Technics and Civilization (Harbinger Books, 1963 HC ed.). Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. (published 1963). p. 76.
LCCN
63-19641. {{
cite book}}
: |chapter-format=
requires |chapter-url=
(
help); Invalid |script-chapter=
: missing prefix (
help); More than one of |pages=
and |page=
specified (
help)
The documentation certainly supports use of only one of the three, so what are we to use for total pages? Last I looked, being able to check page counts versus edition helped validate a specific page range of verified material—or gave a clue as to which direction to move in the new edition to adjust the given page range. Fra nkB 21:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
, has never supported 'number of pages' as a proper use of |pages=
so, yes, you should be seeing the error message that you are seeing. You may not be seeing the error message about your use of |chapter-format=
; that parameter requires that value is assigned to |chapter-url=
. The |chapter-format=
error message is hidden as the result of (in my opinion) a misguided rfc which you can find in the archives. To turn on all error messages, see
Help:CS1 errors#Controlling error message display.|script-chapter=
. That parameter is intended to hold chapter titles that are written using a script other than Latin (Cyrillic, Korean, Greek, Hebrew, etc).|title=
with the title separated by a colon or a dash as appropriate:
|chapter=Chapter II – 4: The Primitive Engineer
|pages=
might be used for the total pages, or, where you cite only part of the book, the page range of that part or chapter. However, the specification of the specific location (page or section number, etc.) of the cited material is not part of the full citation. Where you use the full citation only once the conventional practice is to append the specifier to the citation. In this case we can add it following the cite template. I have made that change for you to illustrate (go ahead and revert it if you wish). (Note that "cite" also needs |postscript=none
.) Give me a yell if you have questions. ~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 01:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|pages=
for the total page count, even when you are putting the full citation in one place and the page range of a specific citation elsewhere. The intended semantics of the |pages=
parameter is only for pointing to ranges of pages where the cited information can be found. If you want to put the total page count into a citation, you need to do it outside the template and outside the cs1 style, because that is not part of cs1 (or cs2). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 02:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
In a full citation (such as produced by {{
cite book}}) |pages=
might be used for the total pages
. No. The template
documentation is clear about this: "do not use to indicate the total number of pages in the source." That statement is backed up by the the style's documentation
section on pages: "Note: CS1 citations do not record the total number of pages in a cited source; do not use this parameter for that purpose."{{
cite book}}
in the example article does not have accompanying short citations, the in-source location is properly specified in |page=
, |pages=
, or |at=
; it is not tacked onto the end between the closing }}
and the closing </ref>
tag as your
did.|pages=
is preceded by "pp." in the rendered output, not suffixed by it. That distinction is important. It would be read as "pages 495" which makes no grammatical sense. In a citation that does list the total pages, it would be rendered either "495 pp." or "495 pages.", which does make grammatical sense. So Trappist is correct: the CS1 style of citation does not list total number of pages, but only uses |pages=
to indicate a range or listing of multiple pages being cited at once.
Imzadi 1979
→ 13:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)References
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)|pages=
sometimes is used for this purpose I was not suggesting that it should be.|at=
) in addition to the page number, as the template does not tolerate both. ~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 23:34, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|at=
for a paragraph with a page number isn't necessary. |page=6, ¶ 2
works to render "p. 6, ¶ 2.", or if you don't want to use the pilcrow, |page=6, para. 2
would give you "p. 6, para. 2.". The same works if you're citing a specific footnote on a published page via |page=3, n. 6
and the like.
Imzadi 1979
→ 08:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)the in-source location is properly specified in". I say: why not? Why can't it be? Where is the rule that everything in a note must be contained between braces? Where short cites are used (by means of sfn or harv, or even without any templates) the "in-source location" is not even near the full citation, let alone in it. To use "pages" for the page range (such as for an article in a journal), AND for in-source location, gives us values like "200-220, 206", which is an inconsistent usage. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) ( talk) 00:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)|page=
,|pages=
, or|at=
; it is not tacked onto the end between the closing}}
and the closing</ref>
tag ...
Because the {{
cite book}}
in the example article does not have accompanying short citations, ...
at which point it continues with the remainder that is quoted above. With the restriction that I specified, then, of course, the proper place for the in-source location is in |page=
, |pages=
, or |at=
because the citation is not bibliographic in form and, using the template parameters in this way is consistent with the template and style documentation to which I referred earlier in that same post. Certainly there is no requirement that in-source locators must use the available parameters, but, to not use the parameters, is inconsistent with the template documentation so why bother using the template at all?|pages=200-220, 206
is a misuse of the parameter. When used with a short cite, it is reasonable and acceptable to set |pages=
to the range of page numbers that an article occupies. When a cs1|2 template is not used with a short cite, then the in-source location parameter must specify which page or pages support the item being cited in the Wikipedia article. It is not reader friendly to specify the whole page range of an article when the cited sentence lies on only one page; it is poor practice to make our readers search through a twenty-one page article for that one sentence on page 206. Alas, there are tools like citoid that scrape bibliographic infomation into cs1|2 citations which our editors then accept as correct so our readers are forced to do the search for that one sentence.not reader friendly" to not supply a specific in-source location, but that is not antithetical to supplying the page range. The point is to understand the value of both, and to supply both.
<ref>...</ref>
tags), and the editor wants to cite the specific location in the same note, where having a short cite (e.g., the "Smith et al. 2009") immediately following the full citation it refers to would be ludicrous. But note: this can come up even where short cites are used. One of the benefits of short cites is that the full citations can be taken out of the notes and collected elsewhere (and typically alphabetized for convenient consultation). But this is not required. The full citations can be left in the notes, which is rather like putting them in the footnotes of a printed book. In such a case it would *not* be proper to include a specific page or location in the citation template, because then that specific location would be included in what subsequent short cites refer to. In such cases putting the specific page following the cite/citation template is not only reasonable, it is the only proper location for it. Putting it into |page=
is entirely unnecessary, and , as you just said, a misuse of the parameter.~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 01:22, 24 December 2016 (UTC)I recently used (Erratum in {{cite journal |last1=<!-- --> |first1=<!-- --> |last2=<!-- --> |first2=<!-- --> |last3=<!-- --> |first3=<!-- --> |year=1989 |title=none |journal=Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry |volume=263 |issue=1 |pages=187–188 |doi=10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X}})" in a reference (see Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry). The output is
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link))For some reason, that last bracket ) can appear on a second line, and is not kept in place by the linewrapping. This is due to the template putting a space between the final . of that citation and the bracket. This is both weird and wrong. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
(Erratum in '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000014-QINU`"'<cite class="citation journal cs1">''Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry''. <b>263</b> (1): 187–188. 1989. [[doi (identifier)|doi]]:[https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X 10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Electroanalytical+Chemistry+and+Interfacial+Electrochemistry&rft.volume=263&rft.issue=1&rft.pages=187-188&rft.date=1989&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+30" class="Z3988"></span><span class="cs1-maint citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: CS1 maint: untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: untitled periodical|link]])</span>)
<span>
tag:
<span class="citation-comment" style="display:none; color:#33aa33"> CS1 maint: Untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: Untitled periodical|link]])</span>
<span class="citation-comment" style="display:none; color:#33aa33">
is supposed to tell the browser that the content is not to be displayed. Instead, it appears to me that the browser assumes that there needs to be a space between whatever came before and whatever follows because the first character in the span is a space (or  
html numeric entity). If I remove the space, or replace it with something else, the browser does not insert a space between the terminal dot and the bracket.margin-left:0.5em;
to the style=
attribute:
(Erratum in '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000018-QINU`"'<cite class="citation journal cs1">''Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry''. <b>263</b> (1): 187–188. 1989. [[doi (identifier)|doi]]:[https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X 10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Electroanalytical+Chemistry+and+Interfacial+Electrochemistry&rft.volume=263&rft.issue=1&rft.pages=187-188&rft.date=1989&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+30" class="Z3988"></span><span class="cs1-maint citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: CS1 maint: untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: untitled periodical|link]])</span>)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link))There are a handful of errors in the |date=
field at
Materiality (auditing)#References. This is because the date field should now only contain actual dates, and not date-related information, e.g., the date that these regulations went into effect. I've no inherent objection to this decision; OTOH, it's probably important to retain the key bibliographic detail that this book is the one that is "Effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after December 15, 2009". (For this kind of technical regulation, the date of effectiveness is more important and more useful for identifying the source than the date of publication.) But I don't see a parameter that's just for adding whatever text you want to the template. Did I overlook an option? What do you recommend? (Please ping me.)
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 19:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|orig-year=
parameter. A less satisfactory (imo) situation would make use of |date=
and |publication date=
, but reverse their recommended usage.
65.88.88.62 (
talk) 20:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|orig-year=enacted May 13, 1913
. That's the best way I know to clearly handle a disparity between and effective date and a publication date, and it may give you an idea on how to proceed.
Imzadi 1979
→ 21:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|editorial-comment-on-this-source=
option.I think what I really want is a |editorial-comment-on-this-source=
option
: There was talk of a |note=
option for CS1, but I don't know what transpired. I tend to use {{
link note}} for these cases.
65.88.88.127 (
talk) 20:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
In |vauthors=
, when an author's initials have one or more multi-byte characters (uppercase Latin characters outside of the ASCII A–Z character set),
Module:Citation/CS1 will treat the initials as a name and render only the first initial:
Wikitext | {{cite journal
|
---|---|
Live | Alexandrov BS, Gelev V, Bishop AR, Usheva A, Rasmunssen KØ (October 2010). "DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field". Physics Letters A/Physics-Bio PH. 374 (10). arXiv: 0910.5294. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.077. |
Sandbox | Alexandrov BS, Gelev V, Bishop AR, Usheva A, Rasmunssen KØ (October 2010). "DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field". Physics Letters A/Physics-Bio PH. 374 (10). arXiv: 0910.5294. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.077. |
Fixed in the sandbox.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
liveweb.archive.org is a rarely used alias to the Wayback machine. It is usually used erroneously for example, notice there is no YYYYMMDD in the URL.
This should render with an error but does not:
{{
cite web}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: liveweb (
help)This correctly renders with an error:
{{
cite web}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)I'm working on a script to find and add snapshot dates in the wikitext (based on existing archivedate data), but a rendered error for liveweb would help. Thanks.
-- Green C 15:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok:
Wikitext | {{cite web
|
---|---|
Live |
"Yahoo!". Yahoo.com. May 3, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2017. {{
cite web}} : |archive-url= is malformed: liveweb (
help)
|
Sandbox |
"Yahoo!". Yahoo.com. May 3, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2017. {{
cite web}} : |archive-url= is malformed: liveweb (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
liveweb.archive.org is a deprecated method .... If it's deprecated, we should not support it.
I propose that we add an extra parameter that instructs Wikipedia to write the author's name as **family name** - **personal name**, for Korean and Chinese authors. This is how Chinese and Koreans write their names. This template guide advises uses to just put it all in **last**, but if I do this then the **harv** template cannot link to the reference properly. Ghrelinger ( talk) 17:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
|surname=
and |given=
. These are aliases for |last=
and |first=
, but are less confusing when working with East Asian names, in which the surname is customarily first, or a mixture of Eastern and Western names.
Kanguole 02:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|author= Wu Ni
, it won't work right for |ref=harv
applications, and if |last=Wu
|first=Ni
(or even |surname=Wu
|given=Ni
) were used, we'd get an extraneous comma resulting in "Wu, Ni" in the rendered citation.
Imzadi 1979
→ 03:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|surname-eastn=
|last=
aliases so that it renders |surname-eastn=
and its matching |givenn=
(or other acceptable alias) without a comma separator|surname=
:{{cite book/new |surname=Surname |given=Given |surname2=Surname |first2=Given |last3=Last |first3=First |title=Title}}
|surname=
is defined to hold eastern family names.|author-separatorn=none
or |author-surname-firstn=y
(and similarly for editors, etc), but as argued above I don't think it's necessarily a good idea.
Kanguole 19:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|author-separatorn=none
or |author-surname-firstn=y
are 'cleaner' implementations. Using |surname-eastn=
is one parameter (which is required anyway) whereas |surname=
plus a separator parameter is two so would bloat a cs1|2 template's author list by as much as a third – especially {{
cite journal}}
templates which can often have numerous Asian authors.Because there has been no further discussion, I have reverted the |surname=
experiment.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:46, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
|author=Wu Ni
), as that is a misuse of "author", corrupts the metadata, and encourages stuff like |author=Doe, John
, and further confusion having to explain why names are handled in different ways. Definitely calls for revising the documentation.just looks ignorant and unprofessional and ridiculous", which suggests a basic WP:JDLI. But, Kanguole has shown professional use of the comma, and I would like to think my own comments (above) show that inclusion of the comma is not "ridiculous". As to "ignorant", well, someone not familiar with standard bibliographic and indexing practice might, the first time they encounter it (perhaps in the seventh grade??), think that "Smith, Frank" is pretty ignorant. It's really a matter of convention. And as I said before, we could establish an understanding that the comma delimits the surname, similar to the use of small caps. The world has conflicting usage re surnames, but this use of the comma could be taken as how we resolve it. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) ( talk) 21:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
|author=
to mush together personal and surnames, which blurs the metadata, and condones what with other names is bad practice (like |author=Frank Smith
).I would like to use the cite AV media template from Wikiversity. When I attempt this it appears in Red, indicating it is unknown. How can the cite AV Media template be used from Wikiversity? Thanks! -- Lbeaumont ( talk) 15:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
{{
citation/core}}
for some cs1|2 templates and an
old version of en.wikipedia's
Module:Citation/CS1 for others. That then gives you some options:
There are a number of articles with references that have "Check |laysummary= value" caused by editors adding a title with the url, for example Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ref 84). Removing the title gets rid of the error message, but doing so removes what appears to be useful information. Is there a way to show the title without it creating this message? if not I like to propose the creation of a parameter "laytitle" or "lay-title" which could be used to prevent these Check value messages and still enable a title to be displayed EdwardUK ( talk) 18:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
|lay-summary=
is a url-holding parameter that should have nothing but a url as an assigned value. The parameter's name is confusing so I believe that it should be deprecated in favor of |lay-url=
. Title text applied to |lay-url=
is the static text 'Lay summary'. I can be persuaded that |lay-title=
should be adopted such that when set, the assigned value modifies the static text and the link from |lay-url=
is applied to the title-text from |lay-title=
but not to the static text:
|lay-title=Heart has enough oxygen to survive hypothermia, CPR crucial |lay-url=http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-07/aps-hhe071206.php |lay-source=EurekAlert! |lay-date=18 July 2006
Take a look at what |format=
is doing in {{cite web|url=http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |title=World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results |work=International Skating Union |format=PDFlink |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224182426/http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |archivedate=2013-12-24 }}
:
"World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results" (PDF). International Skating Union. Archived from
the original (PDFlink) on 2013-12-24. {{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Would making the parenthetical statements which come after the URLs consistent be desirable? -- Izno ( talk) 02:47, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
|format=
produces
"World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results" (PDF). International Skating Union. Archived from
the original (PDF) on 2013-12-24. {{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help), which seems good to me. --
Izno (
talk) 02:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
|archive-format=
:
{{cite web|url=http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |title=World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results |work=International Skating Union |format=PDFlink |archive-format=PDFlink |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224182426/http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |archivedate=2013-12-24}}
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)I had actually entered a "PART II" division under "section" before realizing...
All equivalent.
Can we have a field for sections? For example
yet https://books.google.ca/books?id=vJknBwAAQBAJ contents says:
So clearly chapter 9 and 10 are both part of section II. Both are useful things to be able to cite, 'part' and 'chapter'. Ranze ( talk) 22:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
This overlinking is unhelpful to anyone and looks awful, hard for a typical reader to distinguish from some kind of coding error:
— SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
|title=
and the English one in |trans-title=
. So I'm not clear what point you're trying to make? --
NSH002 (
talk) 09:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | Cohen, Philip J. (1997).
Drugi svjetski rat i suvremeni četnici : Njihov povijesno-politički kontinuitet i posljedice po stabilnost na Balkanu [The World War II and contemporary Chetniks: Their historico-political continuity and implications for stability in the Balkans] (in English and Croatian). Zagreb: Ceres.
ISBN
978-953-6108-44-2. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | Cohen, Philip J. (1997).
Drugi svjetski rat i suvremeni četnici : Njihov povijesno-politički kontinuitet i posljedice po stabilnost na Balkanu [The World War II and contemporary Chetniks: Their historico-political continuity and implications for stability in the Balkans] (in English and Croatian). Zagreb: Ceres.
ISBN
978-953-6108-44-2. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (
help)
|
|title=
. (But in this particular case I wouldn't have used |url=
, since the ISBN link leads to the same place.)
Kanguole 00:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)I would say it's not WP:OLINK from a words-not-sense point of view because these are elinks and not internal links. However, the purpose of OLINK is indeed to reduce (or remove) some "sea of blue". I would venture that what is often 10+ words all linked (to the same location or otherwise), where TransTitle is used, in a row, meets that definition. Additionally, this makes this a bit more consistent when the name of the work (outside of cite web) is internally linked. In the case of cite web: I have a handful of citations in Call to Arms (video game) where, if I linked the works cited to those web pages with translated titles, I would experience a similar "ugh, lots of blue".
But, perhaps there is a better question: how is a citation served/improved by having a translated title? -- Izno ( talk) 12:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
<p>...</p>
tags; not doing so buggers up the context highlighting (and isn't valid html).Huh. I thought it was valid HTML 5 but I see that I was wrong (though there is plenty of exception in the specification regarding closing <p> tags. [1] Your script/gadget should process paragraph elements without closing tags with that much exception.
Indeed, and I might send it that direction. -- Izno ( talk) 14:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
(Copied from the Help Desk.)
Hello, I am trying to fix a "Check |url=
value (
help)" error in
zcash for this URL: https://z.cash/about.html
. It seems like the validation code is incorrectly flagging single-letter domain names like this. How can I report this bug to the maintainer? –
JonathanCross (
talk) 13:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I've verified that https://z.cash/ is a valid website, any ideas? Naraht ( talk) 14:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I took a look at the validation rules. Someone put a lot of energy into trying to to account for specific single letter domains, quirks of TLDs, etc. Much of this is no longer applicable given the vast expansion of Generic TLDs and will continue to cause issues as these domains are more widely used in the future. Can we remove some of the restrictions to make the validation less brittle? – JonathanCross ( talk) 15:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, there appears to be a problem with the date being split by text in the following example
{{cite web |url=https://twitter.com/AwqafM/status/560702214599999489 |title=zz |last= |first= |date=28 January 2015 |website=Twitter |publisher=وزارة الأوقاف - قطر |access-date= |quote=}}
"zz". Twitter. وزارة الأوقاف - قطر. 28 January 2015.
Keith D ( talk) 13:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
|script-publisher=
parameter. As a work-around change the date format to mdy:
{{
lang}}
template appears to work, don't do that because that template will corrupt the metadata.Please can we have something - either a little red error message, or a tracking category (or both) to flag up uses of |language=en
which is totally redundant, since this is the English Wikipedia, and sources are presumed to be in English unless otherwise indicated. Also, judging by the first few hits in
this search, detecting |language=en-GB
, |language=en-US
etc. would be useful. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 14:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
|language=en
does not display anything: {{cite web |title=Title |url=https://www.example.com |language=en|author=Author}}
displays: Author.
"Title". {{
cite web}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help); does a category or red error actually feel necessary? I might be agreeable to a green maintenance message. I agree though, en-X should probably also not display anything. --
Izno (
talk) 14:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
|language=en
is explicitly allowed but hidden by default. This behavior
was suggested by an excellent editor named Redrose64. It was
requested by editors who copy citations from en.WP to WP in other languages; other valid reasons were provided as well. There was also a
discussion about language parameter values of the form en-XX, which are also allowed (the suffix is ignored). –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 16:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
In the cite web template, are there any other valid values for the deadurl parameter, other than yes or no?
For a referenced page that has ever-changing content and where an article needs to refer only to an archived snapshot of that page, what value should be used for deadurl? The original URL still works, the domain still hosts the same site, but the referenced content is no longer on the page.
Additionally, is there a way to cope with the situation where archived content needs to be referenced, and the original URL was dead but is now occupied by a completely different and totally irrelevant site after the domain was purchased by a new owner (perhaps even cases where the site now hosts malware or other illegal content).
I didn't see anything in the documentation, but may have been looking in the wrong place. -- 79.74.156.254 ( talk) 21:35, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Template talk:ISBN#Make the link style consistent with cite xxx instead of magic links for a proposal to change how Template:ISBN creates a link. It currently matches the behavior of "magic linking" (one long link); the proposal is to change the template to match our Cite templates, in which ISBN is linked to ISBN and the number links to Special:BookSources. Please respond at the Template Talk page. Thanks. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 00:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Discussion about dead |doi=
links at
Template_talk:Dead_link#How_to_indicate_dead_implicit_links. --
Green
C 17:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
|doi-inactive-date=
per the templates' documentation. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 18:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)This
edit request to
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On the biography template, it lists Joyce Kozloff as Max Kozloff's ex-spouse, even though they are currently married. Please remove the parenthetical "Ex-Spouse" entry. 2604:2000:E84C:F900:5CFF:EDCE:6E8F:F87A ( talk) 15:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I recently added a paragraph to the documentation article "pages" that was subsequently reverted
here by
User:Redrose64 regarding using the |at=
parameter to recreate a web search where this is to only way to retrieve the source material. This usage of the "at" parameter resulted from a discussion at the helpdesk
here suggested by
User:Thincat. If archived, search for "Best way to cite a FRA Accident report." of February 3, 2017 in the helpdesk archives.
The gist of the situation is this: If the source material can only be seen as the result of a query at a web site, and the resulting page containing the source material does not have a unique URL, how should the citation be written?
It may be that my proposed paragraph did not explain or emphasize the unusual circumstances well enough.-- Arg342 ( talk) 13:06, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
/search?q=item
added to the URL for the website is what is needed. But if I didn't know that, I could only provide something like:
"Search page", The Plant List, Search for Yucca, retrieved 2017-02-05. What we're discussing is how to handle this second case.
Peter coxhead (
talk) 07:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
{{
webarchive}}
supports multiple archive sites). In my experience they both have problems with database searches retaining them long term. Even better add a third from Webcite. --
Green
C 20:33, 8 February 2017 (UTC)This
edit request to
Template:Cite book has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could we get {{{script-series}}}
and {{{trans-series}}}
parameters added to the {{
Cite book}} template? Along the lines of {{{script-title}}}
& {{{trans-title}}}
and {{{script-chapter}}}
& {{{trans-chapter}}}
. I was surprised it didn't exist when I got an error thrown at
Kabukidō Enkyō.
Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁
¡gobble! 23:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template.
Izno (
talk) 23:41, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Has anything changed recently with the way |pmc=
is handled in {{
cite journal}}?
Whatamidoing (WMF) (
talk) 20:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
|pmc=
except the numeric characters. Similarly, the modules do not accept any 'identifier prefix' (doi, isbn, pmid, etc). There are no plans to change that.Could we get {{{script-series}}}
and {{{trans-series}}}
parameters added to the {{
Cite book}} template? Along the lines of {{{script-title}}}
& {{{trans-title}}}
and {{{script-chapter}}}
& {{{trans-chapter}}}
. I was surprised it didn't exist when I got an error thrown at
Kabukidō Enkyō.
Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁
¡gobble! 23:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
|series=Eight Flowers of Ukiyo-e 浮世絵八華
or something similar if it's really important to have the script title of the series in the citation. The script versions of the |title=
and |chapter=
parameters were created because non-Latin scripts should not be italicized and because there can be strange artifacts when the original language is written right to left (most often when digits are part of the title). These two conditions turn out to be rather common (the former much more prevalent than the latter). We do not, for instance, have script parameters for authors which quite often list both the author's name in transcription as well as native script. If we were to add more script parameters, that, it would seem to me, would be where we would consider starting first.Let's revisit the idea of Template:Identifier meta template. I've done one example in the doc of that template, to show the general idea behind it.
Basically this would be a meta template (or a module) to handle all identifier links done in the style of CS1/2 (see list at User:Headbomb/Sandbox).
So the code for {{ doi}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=Digital object identifier |display=doi |separator=: |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=//dx.doi.org/ |allow-free=yes |allow-limited=yes |allow-registration=yes |allow-subscription=yes |access-parameter={{{doi-access|}}} }}
This way people can use {{doi |10.1234/123465 |doi-access=subscription}}
to create
doi:
10.1234/123465
.
The code for {{ PMC}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=PubMed Central |display=PMC |separator= |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC |always-free=yes }}
This way people can use {{PMC|2907408}}
to create
PMC
2907408
.
The code for {{ bibcode}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=Bibcode |display=Bibcode |separator=: |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/ |allow-free=yes |allow-limited=no |allow-registration=mo |allow-subscription=no |access-parameter={{{bibcode-access|}}} }}
This way people can use {{bibcode|1974AJ.....79..819H}}
to create
Bibcode:
1974AJ.....79..819H
.
The template/module would include error checking, and could be invoked by both the individual identifier templates, and CS1/2 templates. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
No one objected, and a notice was left on the citation bot page for a few months now. I say it's time we implement this. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:00, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Over at
c:Template:Cite web, they have a parameter |editor-type=
. Recently I cited a website with no author, but a "compiler and annotator". I did it by setting |author=
"John Doe (compiler and annotator)" but I couldn't do the cite using format "Doe, John" (|first=
|last=
) to match other citations on that page, so the new parameter would be helpful. Thanks to anyone who can add it!
Vzeebjtf (
talk) 06:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
On the Scots Wikipedia, I've been having trouble with CS1, especially the Utilities module. As can be seen at sco:Game Freak, it displays "Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities at line 39: bad argument #1 to 'ipairs' (table expected, got nil)". What can I do to fix this? -- AmaryllisGardener talk 00:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
script_lang_codes
which doesn't exist in
sco:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.
Delaunay triangulation has a bunch of old |accessdate=April 2010
parameters in its external links section. "April 2010" to me looks like a perfectly valid, if unspecific, date format. But the article is now filled with big red errors saying that the accessdate values need to be checked. Is there a reason this style of date is disallowed in this context? Yes, maybe whoever accessed the links on those dates should have also included the day, but there's nothing to check now about the validity of the dates. They are what they are, and the error message are a waste of reader attention. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 18:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
|access-date=
parameters, or comment them out, or fix the date (
this edit 7 April 2010), or validate that the links are correct and useful and replace the existing date with the date of validation – this last especially when these errors are detected in article-supporting citations.Could someone help create this?
Basically, it should be very similar to {{ cite arXiv}}, except without the "fill this with a bot" code. That is, the supported parameters should be
|authors=
and variants|date=
and variants|title=
|citeseerx=
|doi=
should throw an error, telling people to use |citeseerx=
instead. If a valid doi that doesn't start with '10.1.1.' is used, the message should invite users to instead use {{
cite journal}}.Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
A discussion elsewhere prompted me to think about this topic.
Some time ago there was a lot of discussion about adding access signals to cs1|2 citations which discussion resulted in some RFCs. At the end of the RFC comment periods, nothing happened. And then a bot quietly archived the RFCs. So, there they sit, in the archive, unresolved.
So, what are we to do? Nothing? Get the RFCs' sponsor to resurrect them from the archives so that they can be properly closed? Revert the changes to Module:Citation/CS1 etc that support the RFCs? Something else that I haven't thought about?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I have updated Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox and Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox to use the lock images specified in the RFC close. Did I get it right?
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access subscription. |
Sandbox | url-access subscription. |
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access registration. |
Sandbox | url-access registration. |
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access limited. |
Sandbox | url-access limited. |
Wikitext | {{cite journal
|
---|---|
Live | "doi-access free". Journal. doi: 10.12345/12345. |
Sandbox | "doi-access free". Journal. doi: 10.12345/12345. |
Also, why do we need the images in two places? Shouldn't the images in Configuration be sufficient? Not my code so perhaps there is a reason that I'm not understanding.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 13:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I closed the design RfC and am taking a look at the behavioral RfC. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree B2 lacks consensus, but I think that B1 does have enough for a rough consensus. I closed it as overall having a problem because there is a significant body of opinion disputing the whole process. Please see the close for further details. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
|url-access=
and |id-access=
? −
Pintoch (
talk) 21:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
This is why, when these RFCs were first proposed, I suggested that they be simple and not run simultaneously. We have the design RFC that closed with some modicum of consensus. But, its closure is muddied somewhat because it is dependent upon the affirmative closure of the behavior RFC. That closure, if I read the closer correctly, calls into question the very existence of these access signals. Specifically, the closer writes:
There is,however, a greater issue: A significant body of opinion has been expressed below that the entire visual status indicator idea is not acceptable. The above assessment must be interpreted in light of this. I would urge that this close is treated as a tentative indication of how the Citation Template processing would work in a new RfC to see if there is significant buy-in to proceed forward. To move forward with the shaky consensus established below would not comport with WP:CONS. Overall, there is not yet significant consensus on implementation of these citation template behaviors. ( non-admin closure) Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 02:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
It isn't clear to me how this should be interpreted:
I, for one, want a resolution that is unambiguous. As I suspect happens in many RFCs, this behavior RFC raised at least one issue not directly asked in the request: should we really be using access signalling? One could argue that because the question of access signal acceptability was not directly asked, many respondents to the RFC did not state an opinion on that specific point so those who did are disproportionately represented in closer's summary.
There haven't been that many changes since the last module update (none that are pressing) but before the next update, I would like this particular issue to have been put to bed.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:15, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
|registration=
/|subscription=
, and templates like {{
subscription}}/{{
registration}}/{{
Password-protected}}/{{
Subscription or membership required}}/{{
Subscription_or_libraries}}, as well as {{
free access}}/{{
open access}}/{{
closed access}} makes it pretty clear there is consensus to flag access levels.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 14:27, 18 February 2017 (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 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
In using cite book here, I find I'm getting an error for specifying a page and the pages in the book.
More than one of |pages=, |at=, and |page= specified (help)
Since I recall a long ago class in citation specifications which suggested including a page count and specific pages in citing a book, that memory indicates I certainly shouldn't be seeing an error.
SPECIFICALLY:
Lewis Mumford (1934). "Chapter II:" 4: The Primitive Engineer (sectioned). Technics and Civilization (Harbinger Books, 1963 HC ed.). Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. (published 1963). p. 76.
LCCN
63-19641. {{
cite book}}
: |chapter-format=
requires |chapter-url=
(
help); Invalid |script-chapter=
: missing prefix (
help); More than one of |pages=
and |page=
specified (
help)
The documentation certainly supports use of only one of the three, so what are we to use for total pages? Last I looked, being able to check page counts versus edition helped validate a specific page range of verified material—or gave a clue as to which direction to move in the new edition to adjust the given page range. Fra nkB 21:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
, has never supported 'number of pages' as a proper use of |pages=
so, yes, you should be seeing the error message that you are seeing. You may not be seeing the error message about your use of |chapter-format=
; that parameter requires that value is assigned to |chapter-url=
. The |chapter-format=
error message is hidden as the result of (in my opinion) a misguided rfc which you can find in the archives. To turn on all error messages, see
Help:CS1 errors#Controlling error message display.|script-chapter=
. That parameter is intended to hold chapter titles that are written using a script other than Latin (Cyrillic, Korean, Greek, Hebrew, etc).|title=
with the title separated by a colon or a dash as appropriate:
|chapter=Chapter II – 4: The Primitive Engineer
|pages=
might be used for the total pages, or, where you cite only part of the book, the page range of that part or chapter. However, the specification of the specific location (page or section number, etc.) of the cited material is not part of the full citation. Where you use the full citation only once the conventional practice is to append the specifier to the citation. In this case we can add it following the cite template. I have made that change for you to illustrate (go ahead and revert it if you wish). (Note that "cite" also needs |postscript=none
.) Give me a yell if you have questions. ~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 01:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|pages=
for the total page count, even when you are putting the full citation in one place and the page range of a specific citation elsewhere. The intended semantics of the |pages=
parameter is only for pointing to ranges of pages where the cited information can be found. If you want to put the total page count into a citation, you need to do it outside the template and outside the cs1 style, because that is not part of cs1 (or cs2). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 02:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
In a full citation (such as produced by {{
cite book}}) |pages=
might be used for the total pages
. No. The template
documentation is clear about this: "do not use to indicate the total number of pages in the source." That statement is backed up by the the style's documentation
section on pages: "Note: CS1 citations do not record the total number of pages in a cited source; do not use this parameter for that purpose."{{
cite book}}
in the example article does not have accompanying short citations, the in-source location is properly specified in |page=
, |pages=
, or |at=
; it is not tacked onto the end between the closing }}
and the closing </ref>
tag as your
did.|pages=
is preceded by "pp." in the rendered output, not suffixed by it. That distinction is important. It would be read as "pages 495" which makes no grammatical sense. In a citation that does list the total pages, it would be rendered either "495 pp." or "495 pages.", which does make grammatical sense. So Trappist is correct: the CS1 style of citation does not list total number of pages, but only uses |pages=
to indicate a range or listing of multiple pages being cited at once.
Imzadi 1979
→ 13:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)References
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)|pages=
sometimes is used for this purpose I was not suggesting that it should be.|at=
) in addition to the page number, as the template does not tolerate both. ~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 23:34, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|at=
for a paragraph with a page number isn't necessary. |page=6, ¶ 2
works to render "p. 6, ¶ 2.", or if you don't want to use the pilcrow, |page=6, para. 2
would give you "p. 6, para. 2.". The same works if you're citing a specific footnote on a published page via |page=3, n. 6
and the like.
Imzadi 1979
→ 08:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)the in-source location is properly specified in". I say: why not? Why can't it be? Where is the rule that everything in a note must be contained between braces? Where short cites are used (by means of sfn or harv, or even without any templates) the "in-source location" is not even near the full citation, let alone in it. To use "pages" for the page range (such as for an article in a journal), AND for in-source location, gives us values like "200-220, 206", which is an inconsistent usage. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) ( talk) 00:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)|page=
,|pages=
, or|at=
; it is not tacked onto the end between the closing}}
and the closing</ref>
tag ...
Because the {{
cite book}}
in the example article does not have accompanying short citations, ...
at which point it continues with the remainder that is quoted above. With the restriction that I specified, then, of course, the proper place for the in-source location is in |page=
, |pages=
, or |at=
because the citation is not bibliographic in form and, using the template parameters in this way is consistent with the template and style documentation to which I referred earlier in that same post. Certainly there is no requirement that in-source locators must use the available parameters, but, to not use the parameters, is inconsistent with the template documentation so why bother using the template at all?|pages=200-220, 206
is a misuse of the parameter. When used with a short cite, it is reasonable and acceptable to set |pages=
to the range of page numbers that an article occupies. When a cs1|2 template is not used with a short cite, then the in-source location parameter must specify which page or pages support the item being cited in the Wikipedia article. It is not reader friendly to specify the whole page range of an article when the cited sentence lies on only one page; it is poor practice to make our readers search through a twenty-one page article for that one sentence on page 206. Alas, there are tools like citoid that scrape bibliographic infomation into cs1|2 citations which our editors then accept as correct so our readers are forced to do the search for that one sentence.not reader friendly" to not supply a specific in-source location, but that is not antithetical to supplying the page range. The point is to understand the value of both, and to supply both.
<ref>...</ref>
tags), and the editor wants to cite the specific location in the same note, where having a short cite (e.g., the "Smith et al. 2009") immediately following the full citation it refers to would be ludicrous. But note: this can come up even where short cites are used. One of the benefits of short cites is that the full citations can be taken out of the notes and collected elsewhere (and typically alphabetized for convenient consultation). But this is not required. The full citations can be left in the notes, which is rather like putting them in the footnotes of a printed book. In such a case it would *not* be proper to include a specific page or location in the citation template, because then that specific location would be included in what subsequent short cites refer to. In such cases putting the specific page following the cite/citation template is not only reasonable, it is the only proper location for it. Putting it into |page=
is entirely unnecessary, and , as you just said, a misuse of the parameter.~
J. Johnson (JJ) (
talk) 01:22, 24 December 2016 (UTC)I recently used (Erratum in {{cite journal |last1=<!-- --> |first1=<!-- --> |last2=<!-- --> |first2=<!-- --> |last3=<!-- --> |first3=<!-- --> |year=1989 |title=none |journal=Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry |volume=263 |issue=1 |pages=187–188 |doi=10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X}})" in a reference (see Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry). The output is
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link))For some reason, that last bracket ) can appear on a second line, and is not kept in place by the linewrapping. This is due to the template putting a space between the final . of that citation and the bracket. This is both weird and wrong. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
(Erratum in '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000014-QINU`"'<cite class="citation journal cs1">''Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry''. <b>263</b> (1): 187–188. 1989. [[doi (identifier)|doi]]:[https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X 10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Electroanalytical+Chemistry+and+Interfacial+Electrochemistry&rft.volume=263&rft.issue=1&rft.pages=187-188&rft.date=1989&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+30" class="Z3988"></span><span class="cs1-maint citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: CS1 maint: untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: untitled periodical|link]])</span>)
<span>
tag:
<span class="citation-comment" style="display:none; color:#33aa33"> CS1 maint: Untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: Untitled periodical|link]])</span>
<span class="citation-comment" style="display:none; color:#33aa33">
is supposed to tell the browser that the content is not to be displayed. Instead, it appears to me that the browser assumes that there needs to be a space between whatever came before and whatever follows because the first character in the span is a space (or  
html numeric entity). If I remove the space, or replace it with something else, the browser does not insert a space between the terminal dot and the bracket.margin-left:0.5em;
to the style=
attribute:
(Erratum in '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000018-QINU`"'<cite class="citation journal cs1">''Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry''. <b>263</b> (1): 187–188. 1989. [[doi (identifier)|doi]]:[https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X 10.1016/0022-0728(89)80141-X].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Electroanalytical+Chemistry+and+Interfacial+Electrochemistry&rft.volume=263&rft.issue=1&rft.pages=187-188&rft.date=1989&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2F0022-0728%2889%2980141-X&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+30" class="Z3988"></span><span class="cs1-maint citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]}}</code>: CS1 maint: untitled periodical ([[:Category:CS1 maint: untitled periodical|link]])</span>)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link))There are a handful of errors in the |date=
field at
Materiality (auditing)#References. This is because the date field should now only contain actual dates, and not date-related information, e.g., the date that these regulations went into effect. I've no inherent objection to this decision; OTOH, it's probably important to retain the key bibliographic detail that this book is the one that is "Effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after December 15, 2009". (For this kind of technical regulation, the date of effectiveness is more important and more useful for identifying the source than the date of publication.) But I don't see a parameter that's just for adding whatever text you want to the template. Did I overlook an option? What do you recommend? (Please ping me.)
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 19:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|orig-year=
parameter. A less satisfactory (imo) situation would make use of |date=
and |publication date=
, but reverse their recommended usage.
65.88.88.62 (
talk) 20:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|orig-year=enacted May 13, 1913
. That's the best way I know to clearly handle a disparity between and effective date and a publication date, and it may give you an idea on how to proceed.
Imzadi 1979
→ 21:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
|editorial-comment-on-this-source=
option.I think what I really want is a |editorial-comment-on-this-source=
option
: There was talk of a |note=
option for CS1, but I don't know what transpired. I tend to use {{
link note}} for these cases.
65.88.88.127 (
talk) 20:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
In |vauthors=
, when an author's initials have one or more multi-byte characters (uppercase Latin characters outside of the ASCII A–Z character set),
Module:Citation/CS1 will treat the initials as a name and render only the first initial:
Wikitext | {{cite journal
|
---|---|
Live | Alexandrov BS, Gelev V, Bishop AR, Usheva A, Rasmunssen KØ (October 2010). "DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field". Physics Letters A/Physics-Bio PH. 374 (10). arXiv: 0910.5294. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.077. |
Sandbox | Alexandrov BS, Gelev V, Bishop AR, Usheva A, Rasmunssen KØ (October 2010). "DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field". Physics Letters A/Physics-Bio PH. 374 (10). arXiv: 0910.5294. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.077. |
Fixed in the sandbox.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
liveweb.archive.org is a rarely used alias to the Wayback machine. It is usually used erroneously for example, notice there is no YYYYMMDD in the URL.
This should render with an error but does not:
{{
cite web}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: liveweb (
help)This correctly renders with an error:
{{
cite web}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)I'm working on a script to find and add snapshot dates in the wikitext (based on existing archivedate data), but a rendered error for liveweb would help. Thanks.
-- Green C 15:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok:
Wikitext | {{cite web
|
---|---|
Live |
"Yahoo!". Yahoo.com. May 3, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2017. {{
cite web}} : |archive-url= is malformed: liveweb (
help)
|
Sandbox |
"Yahoo!". Yahoo.com. May 3, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2017. {{
cite web}} : |archive-url= is malformed: liveweb (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
liveweb.archive.org is a deprecated method .... If it's deprecated, we should not support it.
I propose that we add an extra parameter that instructs Wikipedia to write the author's name as **family name** - **personal name**, for Korean and Chinese authors. This is how Chinese and Koreans write their names. This template guide advises uses to just put it all in **last**, but if I do this then the **harv** template cannot link to the reference properly. Ghrelinger ( talk) 17:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
|surname=
and |given=
. These are aliases for |last=
and |first=
, but are less confusing when working with East Asian names, in which the surname is customarily first, or a mixture of Eastern and Western names.
Kanguole 02:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|author= Wu Ni
, it won't work right for |ref=harv
applications, and if |last=Wu
|first=Ni
(or even |surname=Wu
|given=Ni
) were used, we'd get an extraneous comma resulting in "Wu, Ni" in the rendered citation.
Imzadi 1979
→ 03:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|surname-eastn=
|last=
aliases so that it renders |surname-eastn=
and its matching |givenn=
(or other acceptable alias) without a comma separator|surname=
:{{cite book/new |surname=Surname |given=Given |surname2=Surname |first2=Given |last3=Last |first3=First |title=Title}}
|surname=
is defined to hold eastern family names.|author-separatorn=none
or |author-surname-firstn=y
(and similarly for editors, etc), but as argued above I don't think it's necessarily a good idea.
Kanguole 19:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
|author-separatorn=none
or |author-surname-firstn=y
are 'cleaner' implementations. Using |surname-eastn=
is one parameter (which is required anyway) whereas |surname=
plus a separator parameter is two so would bloat a cs1|2 template's author list by as much as a third – especially {{
cite journal}}
templates which can often have numerous Asian authors.Because there has been no further discussion, I have reverted the |surname=
experiment.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:46, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
|author=Wu Ni
), as that is a misuse of "author", corrupts the metadata, and encourages stuff like |author=Doe, John
, and further confusion having to explain why names are handled in different ways. Definitely calls for revising the documentation.just looks ignorant and unprofessional and ridiculous", which suggests a basic WP:JDLI. But, Kanguole has shown professional use of the comma, and I would like to think my own comments (above) show that inclusion of the comma is not "ridiculous". As to "ignorant", well, someone not familiar with standard bibliographic and indexing practice might, the first time they encounter it (perhaps in the seventh grade??), think that "Smith, Frank" is pretty ignorant. It's really a matter of convention. And as I said before, we could establish an understanding that the comma delimits the surname, similar to the use of small caps. The world has conflicting usage re surnames, but this use of the comma could be taken as how we resolve it. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) ( talk) 21:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
|author=
to mush together personal and surnames, which blurs the metadata, and condones what with other names is bad practice (like |author=Frank Smith
).I would like to use the cite AV media template from Wikiversity. When I attempt this it appears in Red, indicating it is unknown. How can the cite AV Media template be used from Wikiversity? Thanks! -- Lbeaumont ( talk) 15:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
{{
citation/core}}
for some cs1|2 templates and an
old version of en.wikipedia's
Module:Citation/CS1 for others. That then gives you some options:
There are a number of articles with references that have "Check |laysummary= value" caused by editors adding a title with the url, for example Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ref 84). Removing the title gets rid of the error message, but doing so removes what appears to be useful information. Is there a way to show the title without it creating this message? if not I like to propose the creation of a parameter "laytitle" or "lay-title" which could be used to prevent these Check value messages and still enable a title to be displayed EdwardUK ( talk) 18:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
|lay-summary=
is a url-holding parameter that should have nothing but a url as an assigned value. The parameter's name is confusing so I believe that it should be deprecated in favor of |lay-url=
. Title text applied to |lay-url=
is the static text 'Lay summary'. I can be persuaded that |lay-title=
should be adopted such that when set, the assigned value modifies the static text and the link from |lay-url=
is applied to the title-text from |lay-title=
but not to the static text:
|lay-title=Heart has enough oxygen to survive hypothermia, CPR crucial |lay-url=http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-07/aps-hhe071206.php |lay-source=EurekAlert! |lay-date=18 July 2006
Take a look at what |format=
is doing in {{cite web|url=http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |title=World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results |work=International Skating Union |format=PDFlink |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224182426/http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |archivedate=2013-12-24 }}
:
"World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results" (PDF). International Skating Union. Archived from
the original (PDFlink) on 2013-12-24. {{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Would making the parenthetical statements which come after the URLs consistent be desirable? -- Izno ( talk) 02:47, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
|format=
produces
"World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results" (PDF). International Skating Union. Archived from
the original (PDF) on 2013-12-24. {{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help), which seems good to me. --
Izno (
talk) 02:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
|archive-format=
:
{{cite web|url=http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |title=World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Ladies' results |work=International Skating Union |format=PDFlink |archive-format=PDFlink |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224182426/http://www.isuskating.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-188675-205897-133277-0-file,00.pdf |archivedate=2013-12-24}}
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)I had actually entered a "PART II" division under "section" before realizing...
All equivalent.
Can we have a field for sections? For example
yet https://books.google.ca/books?id=vJknBwAAQBAJ contents says:
So clearly chapter 9 and 10 are both part of section II. Both are useful things to be able to cite, 'part' and 'chapter'. Ranze ( talk) 22:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
This overlinking is unhelpful to anyone and looks awful, hard for a typical reader to distinguish from some kind of coding error:
— SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
|title=
and the English one in |trans-title=
. So I'm not clear what point you're trying to make? --
NSH002 (
talk) 09:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | Cohen, Philip J. (1997).
Drugi svjetski rat i suvremeni četnici : Njihov povijesno-politički kontinuitet i posljedice po stabilnost na Balkanu [The World War II and contemporary Chetniks: Their historico-political continuity and implications for stability in the Balkans] (in English and Croatian). Zagreb: Ceres.
ISBN
978-953-6108-44-2. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | Cohen, Philip J. (1997).
Drugi svjetski rat i suvremeni četnici : Njihov povijesno-politički kontinuitet i posljedice po stabilnost na Balkanu [The World War II and contemporary Chetniks: Their historico-political continuity and implications for stability in the Balkans] (in English and Croatian). Zagreb: Ceres.
ISBN
978-953-6108-44-2. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (
help)
|
|title=
. (But in this particular case I wouldn't have used |url=
, since the ISBN link leads to the same place.)
Kanguole 00:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)I would say it's not WP:OLINK from a words-not-sense point of view because these are elinks and not internal links. However, the purpose of OLINK is indeed to reduce (or remove) some "sea of blue". I would venture that what is often 10+ words all linked (to the same location or otherwise), where TransTitle is used, in a row, meets that definition. Additionally, this makes this a bit more consistent when the name of the work (outside of cite web) is internally linked. In the case of cite web: I have a handful of citations in Call to Arms (video game) where, if I linked the works cited to those web pages with translated titles, I would experience a similar "ugh, lots of blue".
But, perhaps there is a better question: how is a citation served/improved by having a translated title? -- Izno ( talk) 12:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
<p>...</p>
tags; not doing so buggers up the context highlighting (and isn't valid html).Huh. I thought it was valid HTML 5 but I see that I was wrong (though there is plenty of exception in the specification regarding closing <p> tags. [1] Your script/gadget should process paragraph elements without closing tags with that much exception.
Indeed, and I might send it that direction. -- Izno ( talk) 14:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
(Copied from the Help Desk.)
Hello, I am trying to fix a "Check |url=
value (
help)" error in
zcash for this URL: https://z.cash/about.html
. It seems like the validation code is incorrectly flagging single-letter domain names like this. How can I report this bug to the maintainer? –
JonathanCross (
talk) 13:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I've verified that https://z.cash/ is a valid website, any ideas? Naraht ( talk) 14:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I took a look at the validation rules. Someone put a lot of energy into trying to to account for specific single letter domains, quirks of TLDs, etc. Much of this is no longer applicable given the vast expansion of Generic TLDs and will continue to cause issues as these domains are more widely used in the future. Can we remove some of the restrictions to make the validation less brittle? – JonathanCross ( talk) 15:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, there appears to be a problem with the date being split by text in the following example
{{cite web |url=https://twitter.com/AwqafM/status/560702214599999489 |title=zz |last= |first= |date=28 January 2015 |website=Twitter |publisher=وزارة الأوقاف - قطر |access-date= |quote=}}
"zz". Twitter. وزارة الأوقاف - قطر. 28 January 2015.
Keith D ( talk) 13:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
|script-publisher=
parameter. As a work-around change the date format to mdy:
{{
lang}}
template appears to work, don't do that because that template will corrupt the metadata.Please can we have something - either a little red error message, or a tracking category (or both) to flag up uses of |language=en
which is totally redundant, since this is the English Wikipedia, and sources are presumed to be in English unless otherwise indicated. Also, judging by the first few hits in
this search, detecting |language=en-GB
, |language=en-US
etc. would be useful. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 14:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
|language=en
does not display anything: {{cite web |title=Title |url=https://www.example.com |language=en|author=Author}}
displays: Author.
"Title". {{
cite web}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help); does a category or red error actually feel necessary? I might be agreeable to a green maintenance message. I agree though, en-X should probably also not display anything. --
Izno (
talk) 14:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
|language=en
is explicitly allowed but hidden by default. This behavior
was suggested by an excellent editor named Redrose64. It was
requested by editors who copy citations from en.WP to WP in other languages; other valid reasons were provided as well. There was also a
discussion about language parameter values of the form en-XX, which are also allowed (the suffix is ignored). –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 16:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
In the cite web template, are there any other valid values for the deadurl parameter, other than yes or no?
For a referenced page that has ever-changing content and where an article needs to refer only to an archived snapshot of that page, what value should be used for deadurl? The original URL still works, the domain still hosts the same site, but the referenced content is no longer on the page.
Additionally, is there a way to cope with the situation where archived content needs to be referenced, and the original URL was dead but is now occupied by a completely different and totally irrelevant site after the domain was purchased by a new owner (perhaps even cases where the site now hosts malware or other illegal content).
I didn't see anything in the documentation, but may have been looking in the wrong place. -- 79.74.156.254 ( talk) 21:35, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Template talk:ISBN#Make the link style consistent with cite xxx instead of magic links for a proposal to change how Template:ISBN creates a link. It currently matches the behavior of "magic linking" (one long link); the proposal is to change the template to match our Cite templates, in which ISBN is linked to ISBN and the number links to Special:BookSources. Please respond at the Template Talk page. Thanks. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 00:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Discussion about dead |doi=
links at
Template_talk:Dead_link#How_to_indicate_dead_implicit_links. --
Green
C 17:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
|doi-inactive-date=
per the templates' documentation. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 18:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)This
edit request to
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On the biography template, it lists Joyce Kozloff as Max Kozloff's ex-spouse, even though they are currently married. Please remove the parenthetical "Ex-Spouse" entry. 2604:2000:E84C:F900:5CFF:EDCE:6E8F:F87A ( talk) 15:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I recently added a paragraph to the documentation article "pages" that was subsequently reverted
here by
User:Redrose64 regarding using the |at=
parameter to recreate a web search where this is to only way to retrieve the source material. This usage of the "at" parameter resulted from a discussion at the helpdesk
here suggested by
User:Thincat. If archived, search for "Best way to cite a FRA Accident report." of February 3, 2017 in the helpdesk archives.
The gist of the situation is this: If the source material can only be seen as the result of a query at a web site, and the resulting page containing the source material does not have a unique URL, how should the citation be written?
It may be that my proposed paragraph did not explain or emphasize the unusual circumstances well enough.-- Arg342 ( talk) 13:06, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
/search?q=item
added to the URL for the website is what is needed. But if I didn't know that, I could only provide something like:
"Search page", The Plant List, Search for Yucca, retrieved 2017-02-05. What we're discussing is how to handle this second case.
Peter coxhead (
talk) 07:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
{{
webarchive}}
supports multiple archive sites). In my experience they both have problems with database searches retaining them long term. Even better add a third from Webcite. --
Green
C 20:33, 8 February 2017 (UTC)This
edit request to
Template:Cite book has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could we get {{{script-series}}}
and {{{trans-series}}}
parameters added to the {{
Cite book}} template? Along the lines of {{{script-title}}}
& {{{trans-title}}}
and {{{script-chapter}}}
& {{{trans-chapter}}}
. I was surprised it didn't exist when I got an error thrown at
Kabukidō Enkyō.
Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁
¡gobble! 23:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template.
Izno (
talk) 23:41, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Has anything changed recently with the way |pmc=
is handled in {{
cite journal}}?
Whatamidoing (WMF) (
talk) 20:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
|pmc=
except the numeric characters. Similarly, the modules do not accept any 'identifier prefix' (doi, isbn, pmid, etc). There are no plans to change that.Could we get {{{script-series}}}
and {{{trans-series}}}
parameters added to the {{
Cite book}} template? Along the lines of {{{script-title}}}
& {{{trans-title}}}
and {{{script-chapter}}}
& {{{trans-chapter}}}
. I was surprised it didn't exist when I got an error thrown at
Kabukidō Enkyō.
Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁
¡gobble! 23:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
|series=Eight Flowers of Ukiyo-e 浮世絵八華
or something similar if it's really important to have the script title of the series in the citation. The script versions of the |title=
and |chapter=
parameters were created because non-Latin scripts should not be italicized and because there can be strange artifacts when the original language is written right to left (most often when digits are part of the title). These two conditions turn out to be rather common (the former much more prevalent than the latter). We do not, for instance, have script parameters for authors which quite often list both the author's name in transcription as well as native script. If we were to add more script parameters, that, it would seem to me, would be where we would consider starting first.Let's revisit the idea of Template:Identifier meta template. I've done one example in the doc of that template, to show the general idea behind it.
Basically this would be a meta template (or a module) to handle all identifier links done in the style of CS1/2 (see list at User:Headbomb/Sandbox).
So the code for {{ doi}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=Digital object identifier |display=doi |separator=: |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=//dx.doi.org/ |allow-free=yes |allow-limited=yes |allow-registration=yes |allow-subscription=yes |access-parameter={{{doi-access|}}} }}
This way people can use {{doi |10.1234/123465 |doi-access=subscription}}
to create
doi:
10.1234/123465
.
The code for {{ PMC}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=PubMed Central |display=PMC |separator= |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC |always-free=yes }}
This way people can use {{PMC|2907408}}
to create
PMC
2907408
.
The code for {{ bibcode}} would become something like
{{Identifier |link=Bibcode |display=Bibcode |separator=: |id={{{1}}} |base-url-start=adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/ |allow-free=yes |allow-limited=no |allow-registration=mo |allow-subscription=no |access-parameter={{{bibcode-access|}}} }}
This way people can use {{bibcode|1974AJ.....79..819H}}
to create
Bibcode:
1974AJ.....79..819H
.
The template/module would include error checking, and could be invoked by both the individual identifier templates, and CS1/2 templates. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
No one objected, and a notice was left on the citation bot page for a few months now. I say it's time we implement this. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:00, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Over at
c:Template:Cite web, they have a parameter |editor-type=
. Recently I cited a website with no author, but a "compiler and annotator". I did it by setting |author=
"John Doe (compiler and annotator)" but I couldn't do the cite using format "Doe, John" (|first=
|last=
) to match other citations on that page, so the new parameter would be helpful. Thanks to anyone who can add it!
Vzeebjtf (
talk) 06:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
On the Scots Wikipedia, I've been having trouble with CS1, especially the Utilities module. As can be seen at sco:Game Freak, it displays "Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities at line 39: bad argument #1 to 'ipairs' (table expected, got nil)". What can I do to fix this? -- AmaryllisGardener talk 00:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
script_lang_codes
which doesn't exist in
sco:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.
Delaunay triangulation has a bunch of old |accessdate=April 2010
parameters in its external links section. "April 2010" to me looks like a perfectly valid, if unspecific, date format. But the article is now filled with big red errors saying that the accessdate values need to be checked. Is there a reason this style of date is disallowed in this context? Yes, maybe whoever accessed the links on those dates should have also included the day, but there's nothing to check now about the validity of the dates. They are what they are, and the error message are a waste of reader attention. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 18:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
|access-date=
parameters, or comment them out, or fix the date (
this edit 7 April 2010), or validate that the links are correct and useful and replace the existing date with the date of validation – this last especially when these errors are detected in article-supporting citations.Could someone help create this?
Basically, it should be very similar to {{ cite arXiv}}, except without the "fill this with a bot" code. That is, the supported parameters should be
|authors=
and variants|date=
and variants|title=
|citeseerx=
|doi=
should throw an error, telling people to use |citeseerx=
instead. If a valid doi that doesn't start with '10.1.1.' is used, the message should invite users to instead use {{
cite journal}}.Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
A discussion elsewhere prompted me to think about this topic.
Some time ago there was a lot of discussion about adding access signals to cs1|2 citations which discussion resulted in some RFCs. At the end of the RFC comment periods, nothing happened. And then a bot quietly archived the RFCs. So, there they sit, in the archive, unresolved.
So, what are we to do? Nothing? Get the RFCs' sponsor to resurrect them from the archives so that they can be properly closed? Revert the changes to Module:Citation/CS1 etc that support the RFCs? Something else that I haven't thought about?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 12:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I have updated Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox and Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox to use the lock images specified in the RFC close. Did I get it right?
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access subscription. |
Sandbox | url-access subscription. |
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access registration. |
Sandbox | url-access registration. |
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | url-access limited. |
Sandbox | url-access limited. |
Wikitext | {{cite journal
|
---|---|
Live | "doi-access free". Journal. doi: 10.12345/12345. |
Sandbox | "doi-access free". Journal. doi: 10.12345/12345. |
Also, why do we need the images in two places? Shouldn't the images in Configuration be sufficient? Not my code so perhaps there is a reason that I'm not understanding.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 13:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I closed the design RfC and am taking a look at the behavioral RfC. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree B2 lacks consensus, but I think that B1 does have enough for a rough consensus. I closed it as overall having a problem because there is a significant body of opinion disputing the whole process. Please see the close for further details. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
|url-access=
and |id-access=
? −
Pintoch (
talk) 21:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
This is why, when these RFCs were first proposed, I suggested that they be simple and not run simultaneously. We have the design RFC that closed with some modicum of consensus. But, its closure is muddied somewhat because it is dependent upon the affirmative closure of the behavior RFC. That closure, if I read the closer correctly, calls into question the very existence of these access signals. Specifically, the closer writes:
There is,however, a greater issue: A significant body of opinion has been expressed below that the entire visual status indicator idea is not acceptable. The above assessment must be interpreted in light of this. I would urge that this close is treated as a tentative indication of how the Citation Template processing would work in a new RfC to see if there is significant buy-in to proceed forward. To move forward with the shaky consensus established below would not comport with WP:CONS. Overall, there is not yet significant consensus on implementation of these citation template behaviors. ( non-admin closure) Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 02:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
It isn't clear to me how this should be interpreted:
I, for one, want a resolution that is unambiguous. As I suspect happens in many RFCs, this behavior RFC raised at least one issue not directly asked in the request: should we really be using access signalling? One could argue that because the question of access signal acceptability was not directly asked, many respondents to the RFC did not state an opinion on that specific point so those who did are disproportionately represented in closer's summary.
There haven't been that many changes since the last module update (none that are pressing) but before the next update, I would like this particular issue to have been put to bed.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:15, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
|registration=
/|subscription=
, and templates like {{
subscription}}/{{
registration}}/{{
Password-protected}}/{{
Subscription or membership required}}/{{
Subscription_or_libraries}}, as well as {{
free access}}/{{
open access}}/{{
closed access}} makes it pretty clear there is consensus to flag access levels.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 14:27, 18 February 2017 (UTC)