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 60 | ← | Archive 62 | Archive 63 | Archive 64 | Archive 65 | Archive 66 | → | Archive 70 |
Is there a way to mark that a live URL has a subscription or similar access requirement but the archived version is free to read? This is not uncommon with old news articles? An example: live (subscription required to read complete article) archive (full article available for free.) Thryduulf ( talk) 14:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
|url-access=subscription
causes the subscription icon to follow |url=
in the rendered citation:
|url-status=live
{{cite news |title=Title |url=http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |url-access=subscription |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170605084500/http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |archive-date=2017-06-05 |url-status=live}}
|url-status=dead
{{cite news |title=Title |url=http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |url-access=subscription |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170605084500/http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |archive-date=2017-06-05 |url-status=dead}}
|archive-url-status=
because an archived copy of the source's teaser-view of a subscription-only page seems rather pointless to me (though someone thought it a good idea to archive and cite the now defunct
HighBeam Research teaser pages ... (
example).Related question ( Template talk:Cite web redirects here ). The parameter |subscription= is still on the documentation page, but no longer works. Can someone retire it ? TGCP ( talk) 08:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
If you put something like
{{cite journal |last=Foobar |first=Smith |title=Title}}
to produce
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)on a page, the page trancludes itself on its own page. Just preview this section, go down to "Templates used in this preview" and see that "Help talk:Citation Style 1" is listed in the transclusions.
This is weird and shouldn't happen. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
{{use xxx dates}}
templates so that it can auto-format dates. To do that cs1|2 uses the title object's
getContent()
method which records the page as a transclusion.Following up on this discussion after seeing this Citation bot posting and this Help:Citation Style 1 edit.
As a result of the original discussion, we created
Category:CS1 location test which, at this writing contains 822 articles. The code that adds articles to that category does not discriminate between |publication-place=
and |place=
or |location=
having same or different values. When values are the same, cs1|2 renders only one.
I have written an awb script to troll that category and remove redundant parameters. After I run this script, we should have some idea about how multiple |publication-place=
, |place=
, |location=
params are being used.
With regard to Editor Jc3s5h's HELP:CS1 edit, the Prefer "publication-place" over the ambiguous "location"
recommendation, if that is what it is, is contrary to how these parameters are used. This is documented in the original discussion. That edit should, I think, be reverted.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: More than one of |location=
and |place=
specified (
help)where something was written is completely irrelevant to citations. The parameter should be removed. what citation guides recommend mentioning is the location of the publisher, because historically it was important to know where a publisher was so you could order a book from it. It was also useful to distinguish between different journals and magazines and newspapers of different cities that happened to have the same title. Where someone happened to sit down to write words is irrelevant. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Still goes against all citation guides. Because there's no two distinct articles published in the same newspaper, on the same day, with the same title, but which were somehow written in different locations different locations. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 21:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
|location=
should be made the canonical parameter. It's by far the preferred parameter of editors, and is much, much shorter and easier to type.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 04:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)|location=
and |place=
parameters. Perhaps we can find better names, and slowly deprecate the old ones?|write-location=
, |author-location=
, |authoring-place=
, |written-at-place=
, |written-at=
, |foreword-location=
, |dateline-location=
, |lockout-location=
?|publication-place=
, this is already quite descriptive (but long), but it's not completely without ambiguity as well. What about |publisher-place=
instead?put a source into perspective and to further research the background of a publication.If it is necessary to do that in an article, create an end-note or footnote that has whatever extra information is required. Creating more, rather esoteric, parameters does not seem to me to be an answer to the basic question which is: do we keep the
|publication-place=
and |location=
or |place=
functionality (written at...)?|publication-place=
and |place=
or |location=
should all be aliases of |location=
. The only place where this really causes confusion is where conference are held, which is normally put into the full title of the proceedings, so there might be room for |conference-location=
. But |location=
is the location of the publisher, and every style guide is quite clear on this. We should not invent conventions out of nowhere because a some editors don't know how to follow style guides.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 19:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)A few of us have been trying to update the Cantonese Wikipedia's mirror of Module:Citation/CS1 since 2018 without success. If the most recent version (as of today) is ported, all citation templates on the Cantonese Wikipedia return the following error:
The relevant modules and templates on the Cantonese Wikipedia are located at:
Any help will be greatly appreciated. -- Deryck C. 12:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
date_names
table does not exist in your c. 2016 version of
yue:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.|df=dmy-all
to render dates in dmy format. If there are any articles copied from en.wiki that have contain the text {{use dmy dates
or redirects of that (listed in ~/Configuration) then all dates on that particular page will be rendered in dmy format. Show me where you are seeing all dmy date format.There should be a namespace check on these error. Or at least a documentation check on the second one. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite compare}}
with |old=no
which no longer works as it once did (the comparison did not include {{
citation/core}}
). After the change, |old=<anything>
causes {{cite compare}}
to include the 'old' {{citation/core}}
in its rendering.{{
cite journal}}
transcludes
Template:cite journal/doc. Both are in the template namespace so the error categories are expected and desired. To turn-off categorization in the ~/doc page use |no-cat=yes
or one of its aliases.{{
cite arXiv/old}}
called by {{
cite compare}}
in
Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 8. Neither category has been supported by cs1|2 since {{
cite arxiv}}
was converted to lua.The arxiv problem seems fixed now, somehow. Thanks to whoever helped. Still the issue of Wikipedia-namespace errors tracking though. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
did a search on the archive and found this which fixed the |page= option, but it also happens on the |issue= option. Dave Rave ( talk) 00:47, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
|issue=
does not render properly if it includes a comma as in 5-digit numbers. That would have moved the discussion faster.
199.102.115.203 (
talk) 15:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
|id=
parameter instead? Thanks. --
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 09:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
redirects here, but I can't see where the info is. I guess the important thing is what replaces page numbers, and whether it works with harv referencing. —— SN 54129 14:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite ebook}}
was created as vandalism in 2010; now just a redirect to {{
cite book}}
.|chapter=
or |at=
in citations and |loc=
in harv footnotes to get as close as you can. --
AntiCompositeNumber (
talk) 14:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
This would be very useful to indicate which url is meant when you have title/chapter/contribution/etc... Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
|url=
would be an alias for |title-url=
?
Kanguole 00:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
|author-first/last=
are aliases for |first/last=
for symmetry with |editor-first/last=
? --
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 09:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't know if this is a frequent error, but over the years I occasionally ran into citations doubling some of the authors or editors in longer lists. This was probably down to copy&paste errors during citation composition.
This condition could be detected if the template would check the list of (recombined first+last) author names (and likewise the list of editors) for duplicates and display a warning in edit preview.
I'm not sure if such a test would be too expensive to be performed outside edit preview as well, but if not, we would probably need some method to override the test for the (rare) case of multiple people of the same name contributing to a publication.
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 04:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
Some publications distinguish between authors, editors, and series editors. In order not to have to lump together the two types of editors, I would welcome if we had a |series-editor*=
range of parameters in addition to the existing |editor*=
range of parameter variants. They would be treated almost identical to normal editors, but listed after the authors and editors. Where normal editors are indicated by "(ed.)"/"(eds.)", series editors would be indicated by "(series ed.)"/"(series eds.)". Since AFAIK there is at present no separate class for series editors in metadata, they should be classified as editors there.
--
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 04:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|others=
is also available in the meantime. If |series-editor*=
existed, would it require |series=
to exist? –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:38, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|series=
parameter should throw a warning in edit preview or an error in the article, IMO.Hi, I'd like to suggest to add support for an |sbn=
parameter. Right now, editors have to convert
SBNs into
ISBNs and use the |isbn=
parameter instead. However, ISBNs in pre-1968 citations look odd and are historically incorrect. Also, some editors might not know how to convert SBNs into ISBNs (although it is easy) and as a consequence not mention the SBN at all.
Since the conversion is just adding a "0-" prefix to the SBN, adding support for an |sbn=
parameter would be easy, as the template could internally do the conversion for number validation, to implement the underlying ISBN link and to feed metadata. The only difference would be that in the rendered citation, SBNs would correctly display as
instead of incorrectly as
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 11:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
{{cite book/new |title=Title |sbn=356-02201-3}}
internal_link_id()
assembles precomposed link parts stored in ~/Configuration to create the final rendering. The precomposed parts are static and cannot be modified. Because we want the 9-digit version to be displayed and linked using a 10-digit version and because internal_link_id()
has no support for such a combination, and because this is merely cosmetic, I'm not inclined to rewrite working code to support this unique case.0-
. I understood that you want 0-
only when the sbn was hyphenated so 0-356-02201-3 or 0356022013; that requires a rewrite.
There is a zillion reason not to create pointless (identifier) links, chief among them is that none of these links require disambiguation, but there is no difference between a 'manual' link to
International Standard Book Number and one made through a citation template, much like there is no difference between a 'manual' link to
electron and one made via {{
Particles}}. If you're interested in finding a list of articles that link to
International Standard Book Number without a citation template, then it's a simple matter of making a insource:/\[\[/International Standard Book Number/
search for those, either in the
search bar, or with AWB.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 04:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
insource:/\[\[/International Standard Book Number/
. Or without proposing nonsensical schemes like "
Citation identifier link to Standard Book Number" or "
Navbox link to Standard Book Number" or "
Not-a-citation, but-still an identifier link to Standard Book Number" or "
See also section link to Standard Book Number".
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 12:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
|isbn=
rendering from
International Standard Book Number to
International Standard Book Number (identifier)? If I understand what Editor Matthiaspaul is saying, then we should see a dramatic reduction in the number of listed articles at
Special:WhatLinksHere/International Standard Book Number. Do I have this right?[[International Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</span>]]
→
ISBNThere will be exactly the same amount of links to that special page because links to redirects are also listed there. And I also object to having pointless redirects in the first place. The links to ISBN from a citations are no less important than links from manual citations or from a mention in prose or in a see also section, or from a navbox. Especially when done unilaterally without a dedicated RFC asking if people want citations to link to stuff like PubMed Identifier (identifier). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:37, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Presuming that we pursue this, what are the identifier-label links? In the list above are the current identifier-label links followed by:
(identifier)
dab(identifier)
dab and a <span>...</span>
tag that holds the en.wiki article nameFeel free to add other possible redirect constructs
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 15:28, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
wgArticleId
, which is 12
for
Anarchism and 34112310
for this talk page. This numbering is (very roughly) alphabetical for our oldest pages (the order in which they were imported from some previous system), and chronological for pages created after that time.[[International Standard Book Number|ISBN]]
in {{
cite book}}, or any link in a navbox).|nationality=[[United States|American]]
, or |publication-place=[[Cambridge, Massachusetts|Cambridge]]
)obscure the true target:
[[Standard Book Number]]
→
Standard Book Number has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to
International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number|SBN]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|SBN]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number (identifier)'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[piped] link to a suffixed redirect and using a tooltip hack:
[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="Standard Book Number">SBN</span>]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBNobscure the true targetso, to me, the point you are trying to make is somewhat 'obscured'. If it is critical to reveal the true target, the 'hack' can do that:
[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="International Standard Book Number#SBN">SBN</span>]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'International Standard Book Number#SBN'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Number[[Standard Book Number|SBN]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Number[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|SBN]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Numberlinksto:"DOI (identifier)"
(which is a fast search) as opposed to hastemplate:Module:Citation/CS1 insource:doi insource:/\| *(doi|DOI) *=/
(which is a slower search). I don't find the identified negatives to be sufficiently negative, or negative at all (perhaps not positive).Is there a decision here? Do we attempt to use redirects for identifier label links or do we maintain the status quo? If we choose to use redirects, what form do they take?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I have tweaked Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers/sandbox and Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox to create identifier label links in this order:
id_handlers['<ID>'].redirect
when use_identifier_redirects
is true
id_handlers['<ID>'].q
from wikidata when the local wiki has mw.wikibase
installed and wikidata has an article name for the local languageid_handlers['<ID>'].link
a locally provided article nameI have set the various id_handlers['<ID>'].redirect
to be '<ID> (identifier)' where '<ID>' is the same as id_handlers['<ID>'].label
; for |arxiv=
the label is 'arXiv' and the redirect is 'arXiv (identifier)'.
To be done is to create the redirects. There being no objections, I shall do so.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
As I write this,
List of members of the 19th Bundestag is listed at
Category:Pages with script errors for
this error. That error occurs because the live version of the module always attempts to get identifier article titles for the identifier label wikilink from wikidata. The call to mw.wikibase.getEntity()
for the Q value specified in the ~/Configuration id handler for the various ids is expensive. Because the order of evaluation described above is redirects, wikidata, locally defined, choosing to use redirects for identifier label wikilinks can avoid that expense. I have tweaked ~/Identifiers/sandbox so that when a redirect is defined and enabled, the module does not make the call to mw.wikibase.getEntity()
.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 16:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I would like to refresh a proposal I made quite a long while ago at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 11#Suggestion for edition= parameter to treat raw numbers:
The |edition=
parameter should be enhanced to support a number of special numerical values ("1".."99") which are not conflictive with the parameter's normal use. If one of these tokens is found, the code would replace this by "1st", "2nd", "3rd".."99th" before passing on the value.
This would help to further decouple semantics (which edition?) from presentation (f.e. "3rd ed."). It would not only make it easier to add common edition information, but also improve readability, maintainability and translatability, and it would allow to centrally change the rendering in the future, would this become necessary ("3rd ed.", "third ed.", "third edition" etc.), depending on the output device (f.e., display the abbreviated form "3rd ed." on the small display of a mobile device, but "third edition" on a desktop or printout), or target language (e.g. "third edition", "dritte Ausgabe", etc.).
This would be very similar to the |language=
parameter which meanwhile accepts free-flow text like "English", "German", etc. but also a number of special symbols like "en", "de" etc.
In order to avoid conflicts, the recognized special tokens should be restricted to just the numbers "1".."99", but this would already cover the common cases.
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 19:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
|edition=
can still be used for free text, so there would be no backdraw. Also, my suggestion to cover the range "1".."99" was arbitrary. I think, it could be reduced to "1".."25" or even "1".."15" and still be equally useful. After all, few publications actually go through more editions. In the default implementation, this could be implemented as a simple list of 15 (or 25) language-specific replacement strings, which would need to be adjusted to the local replacements when the citation templates are used in a foreign-language Wikipedia. In locales where the scheme would not be useful at all, the strings could just be left empty (or a dummy routine be implemented), so that no replacement would occur. (At a later stage, more complicated cases could always be covered in a locale-specific routine implementing the local rule-set, but this proposal is not about such a more complicated solution. It is about giving editors a chance to start providing the information symbolically at least in the most common cases as early as possible.)
Cobaltcigs has implemented an auto-hyphenation function for ISBNs based on the official ruleset for hyphenation (see {{
Format ISBN}}). I think, this functionality should be incorporated into the citation template framework, so that the displayed ISBNs in citations are always properly formatted no matter if they are formatted with or without hyphens in the |isbn=
parameter (and if the hyphens are inserted in the correct locations there). This can be adapted to SBNs and the new |sbn=
parameter as well.
Optionally, there could be a maintenance message in edit preview showing the correct hyphenation if a given ISBN is using no or a different hyphenation in the source code, so that editors could adjust the parameter input accordingly (for cosmetically reasons only, hence this should not be an error message, and only be visible in preview).
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 20:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
|auto-hyphenation=no
which would be set by bots once they have edited an article. If set to no, this would bypass the hyphenation code, assuming that the bot stored the properly hyphenated string in the citation's source code. Alternatively, properly hyphenated ISBNs could be framed using the ((isbn)) syntax. (|ignore-isbn-error=
.) Or we could introduce a new |entry-isbn=
parameter for not (yet) properly hyphenated ISBNs, invoking the template's auto-hyphenation. Bots would change this to |isbn=
while rewriting the properly hyphenated string.So I suppose I could make the linking default to no
and also take out the error messages (as {{
cite book}} does these things internally). This way the (or a) bot would only need to change | isbn = FOO
to | isbn = {{subst:format ISBN|FOO}}
, rather than maintaining its own list of rules. With those changes made, the result for an ISBN already formatted correctly (or one that has no correct formatting because it's numerically invalid) would just be a null edit. ―
cobaltcigs 15:04, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
<ref>...etc...</ref>
tag. This means the bot would also have to change any ref tags containing a subst:
to use {{subst:#tag:ref|...etc...}}
themselves. Something about pre-save transform order of operations. ―
cobaltcigs 15:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)We hid the missing periodical error message as a result of this discussion. Any reason to keep it hidden?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
|journal=
or a different template entirely. I have added an explanation of that latter situation to the help text on the category page. In general, I support unhiding of the error message for {{
cite journal}}
and {{
cite magazine}}
. Per the outrage in the discussion, {{
cite web}}
should remain unaffected. I would like to see feedback from editors who have been working on resolving these errors. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 15:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC){{
cite web}}
nor {{
cite news}}
have contributed to
Category:CS1 errors: missing periodical since
this edit.{{
cite document}}
renders as a journal is not the fault of the cs1|2 module suite. The module suite knows only that it has been called by {{
cite journal}}
so it renders what it gets as a journal citation.|publisher=
). I might attempt that again.{{
cite document}}
renders as a journal is not the fault of the cs1|2 module suite. It is, by virtue of invoking {{
cite journal}} rather than its own thing.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 19:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite document}}
should redirect to {{
cite journal}}
. {{cite document}}
was
created as a redirect and has remained as a redirect ever since. On the redirect's date of creation, {{cite journal}}
did not use
Module:Citation/CS1 – that would not happen for another three years (
23 March 2013).{{
cite paper}}
template; discussion fizzled and died:
{{
cite web}}
does not use {{
cite journal}}
. Both are independent cs1 templates. {{
cite document}}
, {{
cite paper}}
are redirects to {{cite journal}}
so Module:Citation/CS1 sees them as journal cites because it cannot know how {{cite journal}}
was called.|mode=cs1
(I just made that up without any testing, so it is probably not right). That should be a separate discussion from this one. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 15:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|journal=
is missing. There's no need for a separate thread for this.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 17:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
This has already been discussed.
However: there is e.g. {{
Zagrebački leksikon}}, an encyclopedia citation template. It is meant to be used both to cite individual articles, and to cite the entire encyclopedia in the Bibliography section and have shortened footnotes for the articles, like in
Timeline of Zagreb. Both of these uses are quite legitimate. Since |title=
param is now mandatory, I don't see a way of making the suggested "solution" work without applying some rather ugly hacks to the {{
Zagrebački leksikon}} template. These hacks would also be unnecessary because in reality |title=
is no more "mandatory" in {{
cite encyclopedia}} than |page=
is mandatory in {{
cite book}}.
My suggestion would therefore be to make the |title=
optional.
GregorB (
talk) 14:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
|title=none
in more than just {{
cite journal}}
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 14:57, 22 March 2020 (UTC)applying some rather ugly hacks to the {{ Zagrebački leksikon}} template, change this:
|encyclopedia=Zagrebački leksikon
|title={{{title|}}}
|encyclopedia={{#if:{{{title|}}}|Zagrebački leksikon}}
|title={{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title|}}}|Zagrebački leksikon}}
|title=Zagrebački leksikon
|entry={{{title|}}}
|title=none
solution is not bad, as a way of specifying that the title was intentionally omitted.The limit should be increased to at least 4000000. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
I had trouble adding article-url and article-url-access to a cite in the Cuban Missile Crisis article as follows:
{{
cite journal}}
: |article-url=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)I left it with url= https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1986/april-supplement/fighting-unwinnable-wars instead. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
|article-url=
is an alias of |chapter-url=
. As such it is for use with cs1|2 templates that accept |chapter=
. What you want, I think is:
{{cite journal |last1=Tillman |first1=Barrett |last2=Nichols |first2=John B. III |date=April 1986 |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1986/april-supplement/fighting-unwinnable-wars |url-access=subscription |title=Fighting Unwinnable Wars |journal=Proceedings |issue=Supplement |pages=78–86}}
Consider:
Why does the position of the date in the last example change according to whether or not |author-mask1
is present?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 14:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
|author-mask1=0
so there is no name to display. As far as the rendering is concerned, there is no author. At sometime in the distant past, editors developing the original cs1|2 templates determined that publication dates were at the front when an author/editor name is displayed and towards the end when no names are displayed – presumably so that date isn't the first element displayed in a rendered citation.<code> Since most of us are homebound for the foreseeable future and unable to follow our routines, perhaps it is a good time to make a little time in your evenings to step out and enjoy the night sky and the sights it has to offer.{{sfn|"Sky 2020 March 24 - 31" | 2020 }} References *{{Cite web| title = The Sky This Week, 2020 March 24 - 31| accessdate = 2020-03-25| url = https://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/sky-this-week/the-sky-this-week-2020-march-24-31 | work = Naval Oceanography Portal | date = March 2020 | ref = {{harvid | "Sky 2020 March 24 - 31"| 2020}} | publisher = US Naval Observatory }} </code>
Hi, everybody, i find it very confusing that the tag is named "website", but you cannot give a website-url there. If i quote with cite web, i do have a tag "url=" where i do enter the url of the article and then there is "website", where i normally would enter the main website, for instance: the url is "www.blablabla.com/specialtextonthisauthor.html - then i would enter this in the "url"-place and under "website" would say "www.blablabla.com - but this doesn't work. Shouldn't one name the tag "website" then "title of the website" instead? Kind regards and stay safe, -- Gyanda ( talk) 20:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
|work=
for the name. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 21:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
How can I create a footnote with both date and year as a ref=harv citation? I mainly trying to do this for a bunch of newspaper articles from the same month and don't want to keep using 1921a, 1921b, 1921c, so on. I want the footnote to be NEWSPAPER 19 Apr 1921, NEWSPAPER 9 Apr 1921 and so on in Harvard citation format. I've asked this on another desk before but forgot where it is located. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 21:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
{{cite news |title=Title |date=15 January 2001b |ref=harv}}
{{
cite news}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)<cite class="citation news">"Title". 15 January 2001b.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Title&rft.date=2001-01-15&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3ASpecial%3AExpandTemplates" class="Z3988"></span><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
{{harvnb|15 January 2001b}}
→
15 January 2001b harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREF15_January_2001b (
help){{cite news |title=Title |date=15 January 2001b |ref={{sfnref|15 January 2001b}}}}
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000044-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREF15_January_2001b" class="citation news cs1">"Title". 15 January 2001b.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Title&rft.date=2001-01-15&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+64" class="Z3988"></span>
{{harvnb|''NEWSPAPER'' 9 Apr 1921}}
→
NEWSPAPER 9 Apr 1921{{harvnb|''NEWSPAPER'' 19 Apr 1921}}
→
NEWSPAPER 19 Apr 1921{{cite news |title=World collapses |date=9 April 1921 |newspaper=NEWSPAPER |ref={{sfnref|''NEWSPAPER'' 9 Apr 1921}}}}
{{cite news |title=Never mind |date=19 April 1921 |newspaper=NEWSPAPER |ref={{sfnref|''NEWSPAPER'' 19 Apr 1921}}}}
datea
is confusing. One could assume that there is another citation from the same source with the same date. Using the serial subnotation with the proper timeframe reference (monthyeara, monthyearb
etc. or yeara, yearb
for example) lets the reader know that there are several similar citations in the referenced period.
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 23:43, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
I would try to stay close to what printed style guides like Chicago Manual of Style do so as not to surprise the reader or other editors. Lets start with what the reader will see in the bibliography. KAVEBEAR didn't mention an author for either story, but newspaper stories almost always have a headline. So the first element in the citation, as rendered, will be the article title, and that is what will determine placement in the bibliography. In the case of a duplicate title, the tie will be broken by the next element, the name of the newspaper. But this is the same. So the title will be broken by the next element, the volume of the newspaper. This logic is abominable. So I would do one of two things:
Jc3s5h ( talk) 13:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Wait! I fixed it myself :) See: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template%3ACite_newsgroup%2Fdoc&type=revision&diff=948490292&oldid=945888694
Removed spurious comma from:
| access-date = </nowiki>{{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<nowiki>
to:
| access-date = </nowiki>{{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}<nowiki>
Here's what I was going to ask :)
In Cite newsgroup#vertical format the parameter access-date has an error. I believe the cite newgroup documentation uses an automatically generated date. Unfortunately there is a spurious comma(',') contained. Perhaps this from a previous change from MMMMM DD, YYYY format to DD MMMMM YYYY format.
Template:Cite newsgroup The vertical format example
| access-date = 1 April, 2020
instead of:
| access-date = 1 April 2020
The horizontal format example above it uses the alternate, but correct, date |access-date=April 1, 2020
.
Thanks! Lent ( talk) 09:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I have a question. Where can I find the range of value |pmc. I want to know because my Vietnamese wiki has a little issue about this cs1. I want to enlarge the range of value: from 1 - 6000000 to 1 - 8000000. I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Đư'c ( talk) 16:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
The citation templates encode the ? characters in Handles which breaks them. It is better than the HDL template that simply displays nothing.
HDL template:
HDL parameter: "None".
hdl:
2027/uc1.l0072691827. {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
URL parameter:
"None". {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 17:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | "Capital Building and Grounds". Official Congressional Directory 103d Congress. 193–1994. p. 641. hdl: 2027/uc1.l0072691827. |
Sandbox | "Capital Building and Grounds". Official Congressional Directory 103d Congress. 193–1994. p. 641. hdl: 2027/uc1.l0072691827. |
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:38, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
The article I came across with Bare URLS for citations was Charles Henry Elliott-Smith. Lots of sources came from https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/x/supplement/x/data.pdf, and I used {{ cite news}} for them since automatic citations wouldn't work. Some of them never stated the publisher, another stated it was published by HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE, and I think the publisher is The London Gazette. So who is the publisher? {{ replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 00:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette}}
:
{{London Gazette |issue=36276 |date=7 December 1942 |page=5340 |supp=y}}
Do we have tracking for problems like
this one? In most cases, this would appear as a missing template, so could possibly string match the first part of the entry to find them. For example, {{#invoke:string|find|{{Fenn|Hart|2001}}|^%[%[:Template:|plain=false}}
returns 1, but {{#invoke:string|find|{{harvid|Fenn|Hart|2001}}|^%[%[:Template:|plain=false}}
returns 0. Thanks!
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 16:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
{{Cite book|ref={{Fenn|Hart|2001}}|last1=Hart|first1=Diana|title=Under the Mat: Inside pro wrestlings greatest family |publisher=[[Fenn]]}}
[[:Template:Fenn]]
from |ref={{Fenn|Hart|2001}}
. Because that value is not harv
, cs1|2 uses it as is. Before the value becomes the id
attribute of the citation's wrapping <cite>...</cite>
tag, it is anchor encoded which changes it to Template:Fenn
.|ref=
is a correct value.|ref=
is likely not a beginner and should be careful not to nest or enter template notation in this field unless they know exactly what they are doing... so is it prudent (and easily doable) to limit {{{ref}}} entries to text, {{harvid}} and {{sfnref}}? Or is this an undue restriction?
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 23:56, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
{{harvid}}
or {{sfnref}}
or plain text).ACTUAL ARTICLE TITLE BELONGS HERE. Some script happy editor is blindly changing article titles to this rather than leaving it blank to make a visible error. See, for example, this search which returns articles like Brian Newman. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
If you are using sfns to multiple articles in the same encyclopedia are you supposed to have a separate citation to each article title? The title= error message is annoying. —DIYeditor ( talk) 07:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
harvc}}
may be useful:{{harvnb|Wiesner-Hanks|2006|p=337}}
→
Wiesner-Hanks 2006, p. 337 links to the {{harvc}}
which links to Schaus:
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
, change |encyclopedia=
to |title=
.{{ cite news}} appears to place an extra space after the comma in issue numbers that are four or more digits long. For example, the following citations taken from East Knoyle War Memorial and Herbert Maryon all have this problem:
Does anyone have an idea of how to fix this? I see that the issue has previously been noted, but less productively. -- Usernameunique ( talk) 15:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
{{cite news | title = East Knoyle War Memorial | newspaper = The [[Western Gazette]] | location = Yeovil | page = 8 | issue = ((9,557)) | date = 1 October 1920 | url = http://tinyurl.galegroup.com/tinyurl/7HPKd5 |url-access=subscription |via=Columbia University}}
galegroup.com
but the reader ends up at a Columbia University password protected barrier. Find a better source?In short, this markup produces a weird error message.
{{Cite news|author=[[BBC News]]|author-link=BBC News|title=Test}}
This most likely comes from line 1406.-- ネイ ( talk) 08:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Fixed, I think, in the sandbox:
Wikitext | {{cite news
|
---|---|
Live |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author= value (
help)
|
Sandbox |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite news
|
---|---|
Live |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author-link= value (
help)
|
Sandbox |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author-link= value (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
And, because I found this at
Clement Attlee, check |firstn=
for conflicting wikilinks:
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live |
Beckett, Francis (1998). Clem Attlee: A Biography. Blake.
ISBN
978-1860661013. {{
cite book}} : Check |first1= value (
help); Invalid |ref=harv (
help)
|
Sandbox |
Beckett, Francis (1998). Clem Attlee: A Biography. Blake.
ISBN
978-1860661013. {{
cite book}} : Check |first1= value (
help); Invalid |ref=harv (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite encyclopedia
|
---|---|
Live | Wallace, William A. (1970).
of%20Scientific%20Biography/Albertus%20Magnus%20(Wallace).pdf "Albertus Magnus, Saint" (PDF). In Gillispie, Charles (ed.).
Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol. 1. New York: Scribner & American Council of Learned Societies. pp. 99–103.
ISBN
978-0-684-10114-9. {{
cite encyclopedia}} : Check |url= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | Wallace, William A. (1970).
of%20Scientific%20Biography/Albertus%20Magnus%20(Wallace).pdf "Albertus Magnus, Saint" (PDF). In Gillispie, Charles (ed.).
Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol. 1. New York: Scribner & American Council of Learned Societies. pp. 99–103.
ISBN
978-0-684-10114-9. {{
cite encyclopedia}} : Check |url= value (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 23:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
For the preprint templates ({{
cite arxiv}}
, {{
cite biorxiv}}
, {{
cite citeseerx}}
, {{
cite ssrn}}
), I have adopted the mechanism that supports templates with unique parameters. This allows some streamlining of the validation code. These are all using that mechanism (first four should show no errors:
To these four, I added |publisher=Publisher
, a parameter that is not supported in the limited parameter set:
{{
cite arXiv}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite bioRxiv}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite CiteSeerX}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite SSRN}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help)— Trappist the monk ( talk) 23:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
This is regarding Module:Citation/CS1, lines 1545–1550. In this function, the display of multiple language names honors parameter-pair-separator and parameter-final-separator but ignores parameter-separator (and always uses <comma><space>). I am trying to fix it in jawiki (where we set all three to "、") but not sure whether replacing <comma><space> directly with parameter-separator would cause any problems in the gsub call immediately after. It would be great if this could be fixed here, so we can directly import into jawiki.-- ネイ ( talk) 05:47, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
|language=de, fr, pt
. In jawiki this is displayed as "ドイツ語, フランス語、ポルトガル語" and we want it to be "ドイツ語、フランス語、ポルトガル語".--
ネイ (
talk) 05:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
name = table.concat (language_list, '_,,_'); -- and concatenate with special-secret-separators
name = name:gsub ('_,,_([^_,]+)$', cfg.messages'parameter-final-separator' .. '%1'); -- replace last special-secret-separator with final separator
name = name:gsub ('_,,_', cfg.messages'parameter-separator']); -- replace all other special-secret-separators
_,,_
to appear in the language parameter input. If this could be added to the sandbox and synced later on, it would be great. (I do not prefer copying from a talk page or a sandbox page to our production module in another language)--
ネイ (
talk) 06:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
name = table.concat (language_list, cfg.messages'parameter-separator'], 1, code-1); -- concatenate all but last
name = table.concat ({name, language_listcode]}, cfg.messages'parameter-final-separator']); -- concatenate last with final separator
In the past, the bioRxiv DOI was concatenated from doi: 10.1101/123456 to bioRxiv 123456 with the understanding that 123456 was the identifier (and indeed was used in many URLs). However, the recent update to the biorxiv DOIs would mean this changes from doi: 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862 to bioRxiv 2020.02.07.937862 which really isn't clear, further obfuscates what is actually used by people, and loses the 'identity' of the biorxiv string as an identifier/pseudoidentifier. So I propose we show what should be clear to everyone
A simple AWB run (or
CitationCleanerBot (
talk ·
contribs) run) should be more than sufficient to make the updates from |biorxiv=123456
to |biorxiv=10.1101/123456
in a timely manner.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 18:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title".
bioRxiv
108712. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | "Title".
bioRxiv
108712. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/108712. |
Sandbox | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/108712. |
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title".
bioRxiv
2020.02.07.937862. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | "Title".
bioRxiv
2020.02.07.937862. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862. |
Sandbox | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862. |
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 15:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Some websites provide incorrect information, and converting links to references with Citoid can result in invalid last or first names which are not currently flagged as errors by EXTRACT NAMES. Eg last2 = 2012 which is a year, or first = 11 January (a date part). I am unsure if it is ever valid for a last oe first name to contain digits, or have only digits. I suggest checking the content of author names and using the maintenance category to flag invalid ones. Amousey ( talk) 21:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Tweaks to the sandbox removed some nonsense and added maint cats when a name-holding parameter does not hold any letters:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=3}}
→ 3. Title. {{
cite book}}
: |last=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Black |first = 4}}
→ Black, 4. Title. {{
cite book}}
: |first=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Brown |translator=5,6.9}}
→ Brown. Title. Translated by 5,6.9. {{
cite book}}
: |translator=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |contribution=Contribution |contributor=1.2.3.4,(4-5) |author=Red}}
→ 1.2.3.4,(4-5). "Contribution". Title. By Red. {{
cite book}}
: |contributor=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |editor-last=?????}}
→ ????? (ed.). Title. {{
cite book}}
: |editor-last=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |editor-last=Orange |editor-first=3-4+5=?}}
→ Orange, 3-4+5=? (ed.). Title. {{
cite book}}
: |editor-first=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |interviewer=1 2 |author=Yellow |author2= }}
→ Yellow. Title. Interviewed by 1 2. {{
cite book}}
: |interviewer=
has numeric name (
help)Alphanumeric names not caught:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |contribution=Contribution |contributor=Green 9 |author=Blue |editor=:Violet: |translator=Gray=5}}
This change will create 5 new maint cats.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi! Could I get some help on translating {{ cite web}} to and from other languages in WP:CXT. When translating into Scots, for example, the cite web references come up as grayed out. The "issues" gives:
"Missing reference: A reference could not be transferred to the translation since it uses a template with a different structure.
Please, edit the reference in the translation to fill the missing information." It then gives a link to
Content translations/Templates. However, the template is identical for both languages.
How do I go about making these translate properly through the translation tool? Any ideas? I previously asked at WT:CXT. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 07:59, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
the template is identical for both languages, is there really an issue? Wouldn't a translator simply copy the template rather than attempt to translate it? Are you trying to translate cs1|2 templates that are inside
<ref>...</ref>
tags? If so, then see
mw:Content translation/Templates#Known issues.I propose to update cs1|2 module suite over the weekend 18–19 April 2020. Here are the changes:
character entity in page number lists;
discussionnone
keyword to ~/Configuration;
discussionModule:Citation/CS1/Configuration:
none
keywordModule:Citation/CS1/Whitelist:
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation:
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers:
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css:
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
An oversight on my part, none
is a keyword used in |postscript=
to suppress terminal punctuation, in |ref=
to suppress creation of an anchor ID, in |title=
({{
cite journal}}
and {{
citation}}
when |journal=
has a value) to suppress missing title errors, in |type=
to suppress automatic type annotation ({{
cite AV media notes}}
, {{
cite interview}}
, {{
cite mailinglist}}
, {{
cite map}}
, {{
cite podcast}}
, {{
cite pressrelease}}
, {{
cite report}}
, {{
cite techreport}}
, {{
cite thesis}}
)
{{cite thesis/new |author=Red |date=2020 |title=Title |ref=none |postscript=none |type=none}}
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-000000C9-QINU`"'<cite class="citation thesis cs1">Red (2020). ''Title''</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Adissertation&rft.title=Title&rft.date=2020&rft.au=Red&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+64" class="Z3988"></span>
{{cite journal/new |title=none |journal=Journal}}
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{citation/new |title=none |journal=Journal}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
none
to the keywords{}
table in
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox.
Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox uses the value in the table for the listed parameters. This allows other wikis to specify 'none' in their language.|author*=
parameters in order to indicate that a source does not specify an author. So far, the suggestion is to add a hidden HTML comment like <!-- Staff writer, no byline -->
, but since the exact wording is difficult to remember, this is not easily machine-readable. It would be better if the template would allow this condition to be specified explicitly through some symbolic value like 'none' so that we could issue a specific (centrally defined and maintained) placeholder text would we decide that this is more useful than not displaying anything at all in the future (or there could even be some alternative output format using CSS to make the display of such messages user-configurable).Because of this discussion, I've been having a go at rewriting Template:Citation Style documentation/author using the cs1 doc support code that I wrote to extract canonical and alias names from Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration. I have already done that for Template:Citation Style documentation/language but ~/author is a bit more difficult.
The doc support function function canonical_name_get (AuthorList-Last)
returns last# with a '#' enumerator place-holder character. I don't intend to change that because it's the number sign. Editors will copy parameter lists from template docs for use in articles. I have seen |lastn=<name>
in articles. Those uses were caught because the module sees that parameter name as invalid. Not so for |last#=
.
The module looks at incoming enumerated parameters and replaces the enumerator digits with the place-holder character: last26
→ last#
. Function validate()
then looks in the appropriate table in ~/Whitelist for a match to last#
and returns the assigned value if found, nil else.
But, when the incoming parameter is |last#=<name>
, the parameter appears to be one where the digits have already been replaced so validate()
finds last#
and returns the assigned value. Because last#
is not properly enumerated, its presence in a template is only detected by its absence in the final rendering. When last#
is the only name or is the last name of a list of names, it is not rendered so is only detected by the observant editor. When one of several names, but not the last name, then detected by the gap it causes in the listed names.
I have fixed this in the sandbox. It will be part of the imminent update.
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | One; Two. Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | One; Two. Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | One; Three. Title. {{
cite book}} : Missing |author2= (
help); Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | One; Three. Title. {{
cite book}} : Missing |author2= (
help); Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 17:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#=url_and_=archiveurl_do_not_match -- Green C 14:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Any chance of {{ cite web}} having the ability to specify a mirror-url (as distinct from and separate from a true archive-url)? For example, in JMP (x86 instruction) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), the single current source is no longer available from Intel directly (a PDF reference file) at the url listed. However, I found an alternative mirrored version, but it doesn't feel "correct" to take over the primary url field as it's possible it is still available directly from Intel at a different url. Presumably if url-status was "dead" then the displayed url would go mirror-url (if non-null), then archive-url. Thoughts? — Locke Cole • t • c 06:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
|url=mirror_url
and also use |via=Mirror_Website_Title [mirror]
.
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 02:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
When links go to different web sites they are different citations, even though the site content might be the same. If you want to keep the original Intel link for whatever reason invoke the template two times. The |archive-url=
field is only meant for
web archive sites like archive.org and archive.today --
Green
C 04:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|url-status=dead
, and the document will be available from the archive. No problem. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|archive-url=
field. They are trying to make a primary URL into an archive URL. Both those URLs require a |work=
. --
Green
C 04:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|url=
or use |archive-url=
as intended. You are not "usurping" someone's original URL if it no longer works. --
Izno (
talk) 14:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
|work=
(or |publisher=
), |date=
, |title=
, |archive-url=
, IDs etc.. the template is designed to cite a single website or source. You are trying to combine two websites into a single citation and this breaks the model. What happens if the mirror URL is at a different website (different |work=
field), published on a different |date=
, has a different |title=
, has a different |access-date=
and then the mirror dies and the archive bots try to archive it where do they put the archive URL? Do you suggest we also create parallel mirror arguments for all these fields? If you want to cite two websites invoke two copies of the template. --
Green
C 20:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
It breaks the design of the citation template. [...]... are you familiar with what a mirror site is? TL;dr: it's basically an archive, in fact it's actually better than some archives because there's usually no banner or indicator you're viewing something other than the original work. So all of those additional fields (work, publisher, title, etc.) are identical to the original content. Literally the only additional fields for this change would be
mirror-url=
and possibly mirror-status=
. Functionally, if url-status were set to dead and mirror-url was non-null (and, if implemented, mirror-url was also not dead) then mirror-url would be exposed to readers; if both fields are dead, only then would the archive be invoked. In all cases, the various additional fields you noted remain the same because they all point to the same things.. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 03:24, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|work=
and possibly other metadata getting out of sync (mirrors are not always exactly the same metadata); new maintenance and tracking category issues; bots have to be rewritten to deal with the new fields; no objective understanding for the community of what a mirror site is (eg. a Reuters story carried at both WaPo and NYT some people will see as a mirror of the content). Or, simply invoke two copies of the cite template. Or, simply replace the primary URL with the new URL at the mirror. BTW please do not put mirror URLs in the archive-url field as this creates link rot that bots can not fix/resolve, the |archive-url=
is for one of these:
Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia --
Green
C 05:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Your proposing all these extra fields [...]... two fields, actually.
[...] requiring significant code changes to deal with the interactions with other fields;As someone who used to edit templates rather regularly, I feel very confident in saying it's not actually that significant.
creating unresolvable link rot problems (what happens when the mirror URL dies)And this is in any way worse than the present situation? For web content that has a mirror site, this actually presents less issues, not more...
mismatched |work=
and possibly other metadata getting out of sync (mirrors are not always exactly the same metadata);
This is not a problem, as I already explained. None of those other fields "[get] out of sync" because they are identical to their original source.. they are a
mirror site.. bots have to be rewritten to deal with the new fields;Other than template syntax bots (if such things exist), I don't see a problem that is too burdensome to outweigh the advantages.
no objective understanding for the community of what a mirror site is (eg. a Reuters story carried at both WaPo and NYT some people will see as a mirror of the content)They, like you, could start by reading mirror site. It's at mirror site. Just click here if you want to learn what a mirror site is. Mirror site.
Or, simply invoke two copies of the cite template.And then watch as someone helpfully comes along later, not understanding the significance of the second identical source, and removes it. Brilliant!
Or, simply replace the primary URL with the new URL at the mirror.As I said above:
I don't think I was clear: while my current use was to maintain the original url but provide a mirrored url (since, at the time, it was believed a proper archive wasn't available), there is still a use going forward to provide mirror-url's before the original url dies (in addition to, not instead of, the usual archive-url). Not sure how else to explain that...
BTW please do not put mirror URLs in the archive-url field as this creates link rot that bots can not fix/resolve, the |archive-url=
is for one of these:
Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia
Golly, thanks. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 05:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|archive-url=
field (
"Golly, thanks"), assuming they even read the docs. --
Green
C 17:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
mirror-url
field I could have used instead, oh... right. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 18:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)In Zhongguo wenxue shi there is an article from Chen Guoqiu that I wish to include in the further reading section as an additional resource about a book. It is important, in regards to Chinese and Japanese works, to include the name in the native script of the author and of the title alongside romanized forms of both and/or the translation of the title - Giovanni Vitello does that in his citation in his journal article for a reason. However I am not sure in this citation template how to include those in separate parameters. If there is an "author-nativescript" or "title-nativescript" and/or "title-romanization" I would like to have those fields. These would also help with "editor", "chapter", "work", and "newspaper" parameters too.
Thanks, WhisperToMe ( talk) 22:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
|script-title=
, |script-chapter=
, |script-work=
, |script-newspaper=
, and others; these are documented at the various templates.script-
variants of the name-holding parameters.script-
parameters for names would be used if we are using Chinese sources, which I see more common for BLPs for our local artists as we have invariably more artists in the Chinese medium. I would also see this happening if more of us Singapore-based editors start to dive into the history of Singapore, pulling out articles from non English-mediums like Chinese newspapers from the archives at
https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/.
robertsky (
talk) 03:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
script-
variants of the name-holding parameters would be very useful in Japanese sourcing as there are often (almost always) multiple ways to write a name. For a given name example, see
Hiroyuki. While not as common for surnames, there are still often 2-3 ways to write many of them. ···
日本穣 ·
投稿 ·
Talk to Nihonjoe ·
Join WP Japan! 08:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)|script-author/editor*=
and |script-publisher=
variants:|script-series=
:Hi guys, I'm using the cite book template, and sometimes, within an article, I need to cite different pages of the same book, in different parts of the article. One way to do this is to have each page as a different reference. But that would entail creating several different references in the same article, all with the same information about the same book repeated many times, and only the page number parameter would be different in each instance. I imagine there must be a smarter way to do this. Could anyone please let me know? Thanks! Dr. Vogel ( talk) 20:38, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|ref=harv
to the template. For the subsequent references, I use {{
harvp}}. So it looks something like:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)<ref>...</ref>
, those references aren't included with the others when isolating the references via the various scripts for that purpose. Others' mileage may vary on that issue though.
Imzadi 1979
→ 04:19, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
is not in <ref>...</ref>
tags? Here is the output of your {{harvp|Barnett|2004|p=226|ps=.}}
rewritten as {{sfnp|Barnett|2004|p=226|ps=.}}
:
<ref name="FOOTNOTEBarnett2004226">[[#CITEREFBarnett2004|Barnett (2004)]], p. 226.</ref>
<ref>...</ref>
tags and presents them in textboxes for ease of editing". The second at
User:PleaseStand/segregate-refs.js is the one I use more though because it creates a second edit window below the main one with all of the footnotes listed sequentially and applies temporary names to all of the unnamed references in the body text, allowing me to work with the main text and the footnotes separately but at the same time. (The first replaces the main editing box with the individual text boxes for each footnote.) Both of these scripts ignore {{
sfnp}} and its brethren because sfnp is not enclosed in <ref>...</ref>
within the wikicode. (They also ignore templates like {{
inflation-fn}}, but because that is such a single-purpose it doesn't hamper editing the same way.)
Imzadi 1979
→ 15:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
|pages=
[1] instead of |page=
[1] and provide a comma-separated list of pages or page ranges there:Has there been discussion on how to handle a Subtitle of a book? I just want to make sure I'm doing it right. I can't find anything in the MOS or Template:Cite book that provides direction. I'd love it if there was an actual parameter for it in the template, but I'd appreciate even some guidelines on how to display the title vs subtitle. Thanks. Canute ( talk) 16:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
|sub-title=
parameter would be useful (as is done in citation templates in some other Wikipedias).|title=
parameter.|title-separator=
. Since valid separators can be more than one character (including leading and/or trailing spaces), the way to specify different separators would need some more thought (but is doable) to remain intuitive and easy to use.|title-separator=
is used, its argument will be used as separator with a space appended, so |title-separator=:
would result in ": ", |title-separator=,
in ", ", and |title-separator=string
in "string ".|title-separator=
could be used to override the separator as before, but with one special case: |title-separator=–
or |title-separator=-
would result in " – " rather than "– " (so that users would not have to resort to for this common case).This error is popping up today, as seen on the Warren Street tube station article:
Thanks!
Slambo
(Speak) 13:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Resolves to the wrong link, https://doi.org/10.1101/10.1101/F355933 instead of the correct https://doi.org/10.1101/355933. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 17:05, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
The first "cite thesis" entry on African humid period#External links is producing "thesis thesis" in the displayed text. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 20:36, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
I've opened a discussion on how to make the RefToolbars work with the new Harv mode of the templates, here, in case any of the template maintainers has opinions. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 12:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
I know, not the normal use of a help talk page, but since this one is essentially the CS1/CS2 maintenance noticeboard and presumably watchlisted by all the people who maintain them: Thanks for changing the templates so that I no longer have to type out |ref=harv
when using the RefToolbar & {{
sfn}}.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk) 20:47, 21 April 2020 (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 60 | ← | Archive 62 | Archive 63 | Archive 64 | Archive 65 | Archive 66 | → | Archive 70 |
Is there a way to mark that a live URL has a subscription or similar access requirement but the archived version is free to read? This is not uncommon with old news articles? An example: live (subscription required to read complete article) archive (full article available for free.) Thryduulf ( talk) 14:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
|url-access=subscription
causes the subscription icon to follow |url=
in the rendered citation:
|url-status=live
{{cite news |title=Title |url=http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |url-access=subscription |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170605084500/http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |archive-date=2017-06-05 |url-status=live}}
|url-status=dead
{{cite news |title=Title |url=http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |url-access=subscription |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170605084500/http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/evolucionaelproyectodecomunidadesespeciales-2294682 |archive-date=2017-06-05 |url-status=dead}}
|archive-url-status=
because an archived copy of the source's teaser-view of a subscription-only page seems rather pointless to me (though someone thought it a good idea to archive and cite the now defunct
HighBeam Research teaser pages ... (
example).Related question ( Template talk:Cite web redirects here ). The parameter |subscription= is still on the documentation page, but no longer works. Can someone retire it ? TGCP ( talk) 08:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
If you put something like
{{cite journal |last=Foobar |first=Smith |title=Title}}
to produce
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)on a page, the page trancludes itself on its own page. Just preview this section, go down to "Templates used in this preview" and see that "Help talk:Citation Style 1" is listed in the transclusions.
This is weird and shouldn't happen. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
{{use xxx dates}}
templates so that it can auto-format dates. To do that cs1|2 uses the title object's
getContent()
method which records the page as a transclusion.Following up on this discussion after seeing this Citation bot posting and this Help:Citation Style 1 edit.
As a result of the original discussion, we created
Category:CS1 location test which, at this writing contains 822 articles. The code that adds articles to that category does not discriminate between |publication-place=
and |place=
or |location=
having same or different values. When values are the same, cs1|2 renders only one.
I have written an awb script to troll that category and remove redundant parameters. After I run this script, we should have some idea about how multiple |publication-place=
, |place=
, |location=
params are being used.
With regard to Editor Jc3s5h's HELP:CS1 edit, the Prefer "publication-place" over the ambiguous "location"
recommendation, if that is what it is, is contrary to how these parameters are used. This is documented in the original discussion. That edit should, I think, be reverted.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: More than one of |location=
and |place=
specified (
help)where something was written is completely irrelevant to citations. The parameter should be removed. what citation guides recommend mentioning is the location of the publisher, because historically it was important to know where a publisher was so you could order a book from it. It was also useful to distinguish between different journals and magazines and newspapers of different cities that happened to have the same title. Where someone happened to sit down to write words is irrelevant. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Still goes against all citation guides. Because there's no two distinct articles published in the same newspaper, on the same day, with the same title, but which were somehow written in different locations different locations. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 21:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
|location=
should be made the canonical parameter. It's by far the preferred parameter of editors, and is much, much shorter and easier to type.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 04:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)|location=
and |place=
parameters. Perhaps we can find better names, and slowly deprecate the old ones?|write-location=
, |author-location=
, |authoring-place=
, |written-at-place=
, |written-at=
, |foreword-location=
, |dateline-location=
, |lockout-location=
?|publication-place=
, this is already quite descriptive (but long), but it's not completely without ambiguity as well. What about |publisher-place=
instead?put a source into perspective and to further research the background of a publication.If it is necessary to do that in an article, create an end-note or footnote that has whatever extra information is required. Creating more, rather esoteric, parameters does not seem to me to be an answer to the basic question which is: do we keep the
|publication-place=
and |location=
or |place=
functionality (written at...)?|publication-place=
and |place=
or |location=
should all be aliases of |location=
. The only place where this really causes confusion is where conference are held, which is normally put into the full title of the proceedings, so there might be room for |conference-location=
. But |location=
is the location of the publisher, and every style guide is quite clear on this. We should not invent conventions out of nowhere because a some editors don't know how to follow style guides.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 19:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)A few of us have been trying to update the Cantonese Wikipedia's mirror of Module:Citation/CS1 since 2018 without success. If the most recent version (as of today) is ported, all citation templates on the Cantonese Wikipedia return the following error:
The relevant modules and templates on the Cantonese Wikipedia are located at:
Any help will be greatly appreciated. -- Deryck C. 12:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
date_names
table does not exist in your c. 2016 version of
yue:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.|df=dmy-all
to render dates in dmy format. If there are any articles copied from en.wiki that have contain the text {{use dmy dates
or redirects of that (listed in ~/Configuration) then all dates on that particular page will be rendered in dmy format. Show me where you are seeing all dmy date format.There should be a namespace check on these error. Or at least a documentation check on the second one. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite compare}}
with |old=no
which no longer works as it once did (the comparison did not include {{
citation/core}}
). After the change, |old=<anything>
causes {{cite compare}}
to include the 'old' {{citation/core}}
in its rendering.{{
cite journal}}
transcludes
Template:cite journal/doc. Both are in the template namespace so the error categories are expected and desired. To turn-off categorization in the ~/doc page use |no-cat=yes
or one of its aliases.{{
cite arXiv/old}}
called by {{
cite compare}}
in
Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 8. Neither category has been supported by cs1|2 since {{
cite arxiv}}
was converted to lua.The arxiv problem seems fixed now, somehow. Thanks to whoever helped. Still the issue of Wikipedia-namespace errors tracking though. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
did a search on the archive and found this which fixed the |page= option, but it also happens on the |issue= option. Dave Rave ( talk) 00:47, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
|issue=
does not render properly if it includes a comma as in 5-digit numbers. That would have moved the discussion faster.
199.102.115.203 (
talk) 15:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
|id=
parameter instead? Thanks. --
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 09:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
redirects here, but I can't see where the info is. I guess the important thing is what replaces page numbers, and whether it works with harv referencing. —— SN 54129 14:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite ebook}}
was created as vandalism in 2010; now just a redirect to {{
cite book}}
.|chapter=
or |at=
in citations and |loc=
in harv footnotes to get as close as you can. --
AntiCompositeNumber (
talk) 14:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
This would be very useful to indicate which url is meant when you have title/chapter/contribution/etc... Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
|url=
would be an alias for |title-url=
?
Kanguole 00:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
|author-first/last=
are aliases for |first/last=
for symmetry with |editor-first/last=
? --
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 09:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't know if this is a frequent error, but over the years I occasionally ran into citations doubling some of the authors or editors in longer lists. This was probably down to copy&paste errors during citation composition.
This condition could be detected if the template would check the list of (recombined first+last) author names (and likewise the list of editors) for duplicates and display a warning in edit preview.
I'm not sure if such a test would be too expensive to be performed outside edit preview as well, but if not, we would probably need some method to override the test for the (rare) case of multiple people of the same name contributing to a publication.
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 04:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
Some publications distinguish between authors, editors, and series editors. In order not to have to lump together the two types of editors, I would welcome if we had a |series-editor*=
range of parameters in addition to the existing |editor*=
range of parameter variants. They would be treated almost identical to normal editors, but listed after the authors and editors. Where normal editors are indicated by "(ed.)"/"(eds.)", series editors would be indicated by "(series ed.)"/"(series eds.)". Since AFAIK there is at present no separate class for series editors in metadata, they should be classified as editors there.
--
Matthiaspaul (
talk) 04:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|others=
is also available in the meantime. If |series-editor*=
existed, would it require |series=
to exist? –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:38, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|series=
parameter should throw a warning in edit preview or an error in the article, IMO.Hi, I'd like to suggest to add support for an |sbn=
parameter. Right now, editors have to convert
SBNs into
ISBNs and use the |isbn=
parameter instead. However, ISBNs in pre-1968 citations look odd and are historically incorrect. Also, some editors might not know how to convert SBNs into ISBNs (although it is easy) and as a consequence not mention the SBN at all.
Since the conversion is just adding a "0-" prefix to the SBN, adding support for an |sbn=
parameter would be easy, as the template could internally do the conversion for number validation, to implement the underlying ISBN link and to feed metadata. The only difference would be that in the rendered citation, SBNs would correctly display as
instead of incorrectly as
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 11:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
{{cite book/new |title=Title |sbn=356-02201-3}}
internal_link_id()
assembles precomposed link parts stored in ~/Configuration to create the final rendering. The precomposed parts are static and cannot be modified. Because we want the 9-digit version to be displayed and linked using a 10-digit version and because internal_link_id()
has no support for such a combination, and because this is merely cosmetic, I'm not inclined to rewrite working code to support this unique case.0-
. I understood that you want 0-
only when the sbn was hyphenated so 0-356-02201-3 or 0356022013; that requires a rewrite.
There is a zillion reason not to create pointless (identifier) links, chief among them is that none of these links require disambiguation, but there is no difference between a 'manual' link to
International Standard Book Number and one made through a citation template, much like there is no difference between a 'manual' link to
electron and one made via {{
Particles}}. If you're interested in finding a list of articles that link to
International Standard Book Number without a citation template, then it's a simple matter of making a insource:/\[\[/International Standard Book Number/
search for those, either in the
search bar, or with AWB.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 04:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
insource:/\[\[/International Standard Book Number/
. Or without proposing nonsensical schemes like "
Citation identifier link to Standard Book Number" or "
Navbox link to Standard Book Number" or "
Not-a-citation, but-still an identifier link to Standard Book Number" or "
See also section link to Standard Book Number".
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 12:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
|isbn=
rendering from
International Standard Book Number to
International Standard Book Number (identifier)? If I understand what Editor Matthiaspaul is saying, then we should see a dramatic reduction in the number of listed articles at
Special:WhatLinksHere/International Standard Book Number. Do I have this right?[[International Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</span>]]
→
ISBNThere will be exactly the same amount of links to that special page because links to redirects are also listed there. And I also object to having pointless redirects in the first place. The links to ISBN from a citations are no less important than links from manual citations or from a mention in prose or in a see also section, or from a navbox. Especially when done unilaterally without a dedicated RFC asking if people want citations to link to stuff like PubMed Identifier (identifier). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:37, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Presuming that we pursue this, what are the identifier-label links? In the list above are the current identifier-label links followed by:
(identifier)
dab(identifier)
dab and a <span>...</span>
tag that holds the en.wiki article nameFeel free to add other possible redirect constructs
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 15:28, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
wgArticleId
, which is 12
for
Anarchism and 34112310
for this talk page. This numbering is (very roughly) alphabetical for our oldest pages (the order in which they were imported from some previous system), and chronological for pages created after that time.[[International Standard Book Number|ISBN]]
in {{
cite book}}, or any link in a navbox).|nationality=[[United States|American]]
, or |publication-place=[[Cambridge, Massachusetts|Cambridge]]
)obscure the true target:
[[Standard Book Number]]
→
Standard Book Number has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to
International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number|SBN]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|SBN]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number (identifier)'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[piped] link to a suffixed redirect and using a tooltip hack:
[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="Standard Book Number">SBN</span>]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'Standard Book Number'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBNobscure the true targetso, to me, the point you are trying to make is somewhat 'obscured'. If it is critical to reveal the true target, the 'hack' can do that:
[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|<span title="International Standard Book Number#SBN">SBN</span>]]
→
SBN has a tooltip: 'International Standard Book Number#SBN'; redirects to International Standard Book Number#SBN[[Standard Book Number]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Number[[Standard Book Number|SBN]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Number[[Standard Book Number (identifier)|SBN]]
→ Tooltip:
International Standard Book Numberlinksto:"DOI (identifier)"
(which is a fast search) as opposed to hastemplate:Module:Citation/CS1 insource:doi insource:/\| *(doi|DOI) *=/
(which is a slower search). I don't find the identified negatives to be sufficiently negative, or negative at all (perhaps not positive).Is there a decision here? Do we attempt to use redirects for identifier label links or do we maintain the status quo? If we choose to use redirects, what form do they take?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I have tweaked Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers/sandbox and Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox to create identifier label links in this order:
id_handlers['<ID>'].redirect
when use_identifier_redirects
is true
id_handlers['<ID>'].q
from wikidata when the local wiki has mw.wikibase
installed and wikidata has an article name for the local languageid_handlers['<ID>'].link
a locally provided article nameI have set the various id_handlers['<ID>'].redirect
to be '<ID> (identifier)' where '<ID>' is the same as id_handlers['<ID>'].label
; for |arxiv=
the label is 'arXiv' and the redirect is 'arXiv (identifier)'.
To be done is to create the redirects. There being no objections, I shall do so.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
As I write this,
List of members of the 19th Bundestag is listed at
Category:Pages with script errors for
this error. That error occurs because the live version of the module always attempts to get identifier article titles for the identifier label wikilink from wikidata. The call to mw.wikibase.getEntity()
for the Q value specified in the ~/Configuration id handler for the various ids is expensive. Because the order of evaluation described above is redirects, wikidata, locally defined, choosing to use redirects for identifier label wikilinks can avoid that expense. I have tweaked ~/Identifiers/sandbox so that when a redirect is defined and enabled, the module does not make the call to mw.wikibase.getEntity()
.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 16:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I would like to refresh a proposal I made quite a long while ago at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 11#Suggestion for edition= parameter to treat raw numbers:
The |edition=
parameter should be enhanced to support a number of special numerical values ("1".."99") which are not conflictive with the parameter's normal use. If one of these tokens is found, the code would replace this by "1st", "2nd", "3rd".."99th" before passing on the value.
This would help to further decouple semantics (which edition?) from presentation (f.e. "3rd ed."). It would not only make it easier to add common edition information, but also improve readability, maintainability and translatability, and it would allow to centrally change the rendering in the future, would this become necessary ("3rd ed.", "third ed.", "third edition" etc.), depending on the output device (f.e., display the abbreviated form "3rd ed." on the small display of a mobile device, but "third edition" on a desktop or printout), or target language (e.g. "third edition", "dritte Ausgabe", etc.).
This would be very similar to the |language=
parameter which meanwhile accepts free-flow text like "English", "German", etc. but also a number of special symbols like "en", "de" etc.
In order to avoid conflicts, the recognized special tokens should be restricted to just the numbers "1".."99", but this would already cover the common cases.
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 19:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
|edition=
can still be used for free text, so there would be no backdraw. Also, my suggestion to cover the range "1".."99" was arbitrary. I think, it could be reduced to "1".."25" or even "1".."15" and still be equally useful. After all, few publications actually go through more editions. In the default implementation, this could be implemented as a simple list of 15 (or 25) language-specific replacement strings, which would need to be adjusted to the local replacements when the citation templates are used in a foreign-language Wikipedia. In locales where the scheme would not be useful at all, the strings could just be left empty (or a dummy routine be implemented), so that no replacement would occur. (At a later stage, more complicated cases could always be covered in a locale-specific routine implementing the local rule-set, but this proposal is not about such a more complicated solution. It is about giving editors a chance to start providing the information symbolically at least in the most common cases as early as possible.)
Cobaltcigs has implemented an auto-hyphenation function for ISBNs based on the official ruleset for hyphenation (see {{
Format ISBN}}). I think, this functionality should be incorporated into the citation template framework, so that the displayed ISBNs in citations are always properly formatted no matter if they are formatted with or without hyphens in the |isbn=
parameter (and if the hyphens are inserted in the correct locations there). This can be adapted to SBNs and the new |sbn=
parameter as well.
Optionally, there could be a maintenance message in edit preview showing the correct hyphenation if a given ISBN is using no or a different hyphenation in the source code, so that editors could adjust the parameter input accordingly (for cosmetically reasons only, hence this should not be an error message, and only be visible in preview).
-- Matthiaspaul ( talk) 20:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
|auto-hyphenation=no
which would be set by bots once they have edited an article. If set to no, this would bypass the hyphenation code, assuming that the bot stored the properly hyphenated string in the citation's source code. Alternatively, properly hyphenated ISBNs could be framed using the ((isbn)) syntax. (|ignore-isbn-error=
.) Or we could introduce a new |entry-isbn=
parameter for not (yet) properly hyphenated ISBNs, invoking the template's auto-hyphenation. Bots would change this to |isbn=
while rewriting the properly hyphenated string.So I suppose I could make the linking default to no
and also take out the error messages (as {{
cite book}} does these things internally). This way the (or a) bot would only need to change | isbn = FOO
to | isbn = {{subst:format ISBN|FOO}}
, rather than maintaining its own list of rules. With those changes made, the result for an ISBN already formatted correctly (or one that has no correct formatting because it's numerically invalid) would just be a null edit. ―
cobaltcigs 15:04, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
<ref>...etc...</ref>
tag. This means the bot would also have to change any ref tags containing a subst:
to use {{subst:#tag:ref|...etc...}}
themselves. Something about pre-save transform order of operations. ―
cobaltcigs 15:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)We hid the missing periodical error message as a result of this discussion. Any reason to keep it hidden?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
|journal=
or a different template entirely. I have added an explanation of that latter situation to the help text on the category page. In general, I support unhiding of the error message for {{
cite journal}}
and {{
cite magazine}}
. Per the outrage in the discussion, {{
cite web}}
should remain unaffected. I would like to see feedback from editors who have been working on resolving these errors. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 15:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC){{
cite web}}
nor {{
cite news}}
have contributed to
Category:CS1 errors: missing periodical since
this edit.{{
cite document}}
renders as a journal is not the fault of the cs1|2 module suite. The module suite knows only that it has been called by {{
cite journal}}
so it renders what it gets as a journal citation.|publisher=
). I might attempt that again.{{
cite document}}
renders as a journal is not the fault of the cs1|2 module suite. It is, by virtue of invoking {{
cite journal}} rather than its own thing.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 19:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
cite document}}
should redirect to {{
cite journal}}
. {{cite document}}
was
created as a redirect and has remained as a redirect ever since. On the redirect's date of creation, {{cite journal}}
did not use
Module:Citation/CS1 – that would not happen for another three years (
23 March 2013).{{
cite paper}}
template; discussion fizzled and died:
{{
cite web}}
does not use {{
cite journal}}
. Both are independent cs1 templates. {{
cite document}}
, {{
cite paper}}
are redirects to {{cite journal}}
so Module:Citation/CS1 sees them as journal cites because it cannot know how {{cite journal}}
was called.|mode=cs1
(I just made that up without any testing, so it is probably not right). That should be a separate discussion from this one. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 15:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
|journal=
is missing. There's no need for a separate thread for this.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 17:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
This has already been discussed.
However: there is e.g. {{
Zagrebački leksikon}}, an encyclopedia citation template. It is meant to be used both to cite individual articles, and to cite the entire encyclopedia in the Bibliography section and have shortened footnotes for the articles, like in
Timeline of Zagreb. Both of these uses are quite legitimate. Since |title=
param is now mandatory, I don't see a way of making the suggested "solution" work without applying some rather ugly hacks to the {{
Zagrebački leksikon}} template. These hacks would also be unnecessary because in reality |title=
is no more "mandatory" in {{
cite encyclopedia}} than |page=
is mandatory in {{
cite book}}.
My suggestion would therefore be to make the |title=
optional.
GregorB (
talk) 14:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
|title=none
in more than just {{
cite journal}}
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 14:57, 22 March 2020 (UTC)applying some rather ugly hacks to the {{ Zagrebački leksikon}} template, change this:
|encyclopedia=Zagrebački leksikon
|title={{{title|}}}
|encyclopedia={{#if:{{{title|}}}|Zagrebački leksikon}}
|title={{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title|}}}|Zagrebački leksikon}}
|title=Zagrebački leksikon
|entry={{{title|}}}
|title=none
solution is not bad, as a way of specifying that the title was intentionally omitted.The limit should be increased to at least 4000000. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
I had trouble adding article-url and article-url-access to a cite in the Cuban Missile Crisis article as follows:
{{
cite journal}}
: |article-url=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)I left it with url= https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1986/april-supplement/fighting-unwinnable-wars instead. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
|article-url=
is an alias of |chapter-url=
. As such it is for use with cs1|2 templates that accept |chapter=
. What you want, I think is:
{{cite journal |last1=Tillman |first1=Barrett |last2=Nichols |first2=John B. III |date=April 1986 |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1986/april-supplement/fighting-unwinnable-wars |url-access=subscription |title=Fighting Unwinnable Wars |journal=Proceedings |issue=Supplement |pages=78–86}}
Consider:
Why does the position of the date in the last example change according to whether or not |author-mask1
is present?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 14:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
|author-mask1=0
so there is no name to display. As far as the rendering is concerned, there is no author. At sometime in the distant past, editors developing the original cs1|2 templates determined that publication dates were at the front when an author/editor name is displayed and towards the end when no names are displayed – presumably so that date isn't the first element displayed in a rendered citation.<code> Since most of us are homebound for the foreseeable future and unable to follow our routines, perhaps it is a good time to make a little time in your evenings to step out and enjoy the night sky and the sights it has to offer.{{sfn|"Sky 2020 March 24 - 31" | 2020 }} References *{{Cite web| title = The Sky This Week, 2020 March 24 - 31| accessdate = 2020-03-25| url = https://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/sky-this-week/the-sky-this-week-2020-march-24-31 | work = Naval Oceanography Portal | date = March 2020 | ref = {{harvid | "Sky 2020 March 24 - 31"| 2020}} | publisher = US Naval Observatory }} </code>
Hi, everybody, i find it very confusing that the tag is named "website", but you cannot give a website-url there. If i quote with cite web, i do have a tag "url=" where i do enter the url of the article and then there is "website", where i normally would enter the main website, for instance: the url is "www.blablabla.com/specialtextonthisauthor.html - then i would enter this in the "url"-place and under "website" would say "www.blablabla.com - but this doesn't work. Shouldn't one name the tag "website" then "title of the website" instead? Kind regards and stay safe, -- Gyanda ( talk) 20:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
|work=
for the name. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 21:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
How can I create a footnote with both date and year as a ref=harv citation? I mainly trying to do this for a bunch of newspaper articles from the same month and don't want to keep using 1921a, 1921b, 1921c, so on. I want the footnote to be NEWSPAPER 19 Apr 1921, NEWSPAPER 9 Apr 1921 and so on in Harvard citation format. I've asked this on another desk before but forgot where it is located. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 21:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
{{cite news |title=Title |date=15 January 2001b |ref=harv}}
{{
cite news}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)<cite class="citation news">"Title". 15 January 2001b.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Title&rft.date=2001-01-15&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3ASpecial%3AExpandTemplates" class="Z3988"></span><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
{{harvnb|15 January 2001b}}
→
15 January 2001b harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREF15_January_2001b (
help){{cite news |title=Title |date=15 January 2001b |ref={{sfnref|15 January 2001b}}}}
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000044-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREF15_January_2001b" class="citation news cs1">"Title". 15 January 2001b.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Title&rft.date=2001-01-15&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+64" class="Z3988"></span>
{{harvnb|''NEWSPAPER'' 9 Apr 1921}}
→
NEWSPAPER 9 Apr 1921{{harvnb|''NEWSPAPER'' 19 Apr 1921}}
→
NEWSPAPER 19 Apr 1921{{cite news |title=World collapses |date=9 April 1921 |newspaper=NEWSPAPER |ref={{sfnref|''NEWSPAPER'' 9 Apr 1921}}}}
{{cite news |title=Never mind |date=19 April 1921 |newspaper=NEWSPAPER |ref={{sfnref|''NEWSPAPER'' 19 Apr 1921}}}}
datea
is confusing. One could assume that there is another citation from the same source with the same date. Using the serial subnotation with the proper timeframe reference (monthyeara, monthyearb
etc. or yeara, yearb
for example) lets the reader know that there are several similar citations in the referenced period.
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 23:43, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
I would try to stay close to what printed style guides like Chicago Manual of Style do so as not to surprise the reader or other editors. Lets start with what the reader will see in the bibliography. KAVEBEAR didn't mention an author for either story, but newspaper stories almost always have a headline. So the first element in the citation, as rendered, will be the article title, and that is what will determine placement in the bibliography. In the case of a duplicate title, the tie will be broken by the next element, the name of the newspaper. But this is the same. So the title will be broken by the next element, the volume of the newspaper. This logic is abominable. So I would do one of two things:
Jc3s5h ( talk) 13:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Wait! I fixed it myself :) See: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template%3ACite_newsgroup%2Fdoc&type=revision&diff=948490292&oldid=945888694
Removed spurious comma from:
| access-date = </nowiki>{{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<nowiki>
to:
| access-date = </nowiki>{{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}<nowiki>
Here's what I was going to ask :)
In Cite newsgroup#vertical format the parameter access-date has an error. I believe the cite newgroup documentation uses an automatically generated date. Unfortunately there is a spurious comma(',') contained. Perhaps this from a previous change from MMMMM DD, YYYY format to DD MMMMM YYYY format.
Template:Cite newsgroup The vertical format example
| access-date = 1 April, 2020
instead of:
| access-date = 1 April 2020
The horizontal format example above it uses the alternate, but correct, date |access-date=April 1, 2020
.
Thanks! Lent ( talk) 09:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I have a question. Where can I find the range of value |pmc. I want to know because my Vietnamese wiki has a little issue about this cs1. I want to enlarge the range of value: from 1 - 6000000 to 1 - 8000000. I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Đư'c ( talk) 16:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
The citation templates encode the ? characters in Handles which breaks them. It is better than the HDL template that simply displays nothing.
HDL template:
HDL parameter: "None".
hdl:
2027/uc1.l0072691827. {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
URL parameter:
"None". {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 17:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | "Capital Building and Grounds". Official Congressional Directory 103d Congress. 193–1994. p. 641. hdl: 2027/uc1.l0072691827. |
Sandbox | "Capital Building and Grounds". Official Congressional Directory 103d Congress. 193–1994. p. 641. hdl: 2027/uc1.l0072691827. |
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:38, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
The article I came across with Bare URLS for citations was Charles Henry Elliott-Smith. Lots of sources came from https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/x/supplement/x/data.pdf, and I used {{ cite news}} for them since automatic citations wouldn't work. Some of them never stated the publisher, another stated it was published by HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE, and I think the publisher is The London Gazette. So who is the publisher? {{ replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 00:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette}}
:
{{London Gazette |issue=36276 |date=7 December 1942 |page=5340 |supp=y}}
Do we have tracking for problems like
this one? In most cases, this would appear as a missing template, so could possibly string match the first part of the entry to find them. For example, {{#invoke:string|find|{{Fenn|Hart|2001}}|^%[%[:Template:|plain=false}}
returns 1, but {{#invoke:string|find|{{harvid|Fenn|Hart|2001}}|^%[%[:Template:|plain=false}}
returns 0. Thanks!
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 16:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
{{Cite book|ref={{Fenn|Hart|2001}}|last1=Hart|first1=Diana|title=Under the Mat: Inside pro wrestlings greatest family |publisher=[[Fenn]]}}
[[:Template:Fenn]]
from |ref={{Fenn|Hart|2001}}
. Because that value is not harv
, cs1|2 uses it as is. Before the value becomes the id
attribute of the citation's wrapping <cite>...</cite>
tag, it is anchor encoded which changes it to Template:Fenn
.|ref=
is a correct value.|ref=
is likely not a beginner and should be careful not to nest or enter template notation in this field unless they know exactly what they are doing... so is it prudent (and easily doable) to limit {{{ref}}} entries to text, {{harvid}} and {{sfnref}}? Or is this an undue restriction?
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 23:56, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
{{harvid}}
or {{sfnref}}
or plain text).ACTUAL ARTICLE TITLE BELONGS HERE. Some script happy editor is blindly changing article titles to this rather than leaving it blank to make a visible error. See, for example, this search which returns articles like Brian Newman. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
If you are using sfns to multiple articles in the same encyclopedia are you supposed to have a separate citation to each article title? The title= error message is annoying. —DIYeditor ( talk) 07:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
harvc}}
may be useful:{{harvnb|Wiesner-Hanks|2006|p=337}}
→
Wiesner-Hanks 2006, p. 337 links to the {{harvc}}
which links to Schaus:
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
, change |encyclopedia=
to |title=
.{{ cite news}} appears to place an extra space after the comma in issue numbers that are four or more digits long. For example, the following citations taken from East Knoyle War Memorial and Herbert Maryon all have this problem:
Does anyone have an idea of how to fix this? I see that the issue has previously been noted, but less productively. -- Usernameunique ( talk) 15:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
{{cite news | title = East Knoyle War Memorial | newspaper = The [[Western Gazette]] | location = Yeovil | page = 8 | issue = ((9,557)) | date = 1 October 1920 | url = http://tinyurl.galegroup.com/tinyurl/7HPKd5 |url-access=subscription |via=Columbia University}}
galegroup.com
but the reader ends up at a Columbia University password protected barrier. Find a better source?In short, this markup produces a weird error message.
{{Cite news|author=[[BBC News]]|author-link=BBC News|title=Test}}
This most likely comes from line 1406.-- ネイ ( talk) 08:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Fixed, I think, in the sandbox:
Wikitext | {{cite news
|
---|---|
Live |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author= value (
help)
|
Sandbox |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite news
|
---|---|
Live |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author-link= value (
help)
|
Sandbox |
BBC News. "Test". {{
cite news}} : Check |author-link= value (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
And, because I found this at
Clement Attlee, check |firstn=
for conflicting wikilinks:
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live |
Beckett, Francis (1998). Clem Attlee: A Biography. Blake.
ISBN
978-1860661013. {{
cite book}} : Check |first1= value (
help); Invalid |ref=harv (
help)
|
Sandbox |
Beckett, Francis (1998). Clem Attlee: A Biography. Blake.
ISBN
978-1860661013. {{
cite book}} : Check |first1= value (
help); Invalid |ref=harv (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite encyclopedia
|
---|---|
Live | Wallace, William A. (1970).
of%20Scientific%20Biography/Albertus%20Magnus%20(Wallace).pdf "Albertus Magnus, Saint" (PDF). In Gillispie, Charles (ed.).
Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol. 1. New York: Scribner & American Council of Learned Societies. pp. 99–103.
ISBN
978-0-684-10114-9. {{
cite encyclopedia}} : Check |url= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | Wallace, William A. (1970).
of%20Scientific%20Biography/Albertus%20Magnus%20(Wallace).pdf "Albertus Magnus, Saint" (PDF). In Gillispie, Charles (ed.).
Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol. 1. New York: Scribner & American Council of Learned Societies. pp. 99–103.
ISBN
978-0-684-10114-9. {{
cite encyclopedia}} : Check |url= value (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 23:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
For the preprint templates ({{
cite arxiv}}
, {{
cite biorxiv}}
, {{
cite citeseerx}}
, {{
cite ssrn}}
), I have adopted the mechanism that supports templates with unique parameters. This allows some streamlining of the validation code. These are all using that mechanism (first four should show no errors:
To these four, I added |publisher=Publisher
, a parameter that is not supported in the limited parameter set:
{{
cite arXiv}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite bioRxiv}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite CiteSeerX}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help){{
cite SSRN}}
: Unknown parameter |publisher=
ignored (
help)— Trappist the monk ( talk) 23:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
This is regarding Module:Citation/CS1, lines 1545–1550. In this function, the display of multiple language names honors parameter-pair-separator and parameter-final-separator but ignores parameter-separator (and always uses <comma><space>). I am trying to fix it in jawiki (where we set all three to "、") but not sure whether replacing <comma><space> directly with parameter-separator would cause any problems in the gsub call immediately after. It would be great if this could be fixed here, so we can directly import into jawiki.-- ネイ ( talk) 05:47, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
|language=de, fr, pt
. In jawiki this is displayed as "ドイツ語, フランス語、ポルトガル語" and we want it to be "ドイツ語、フランス語、ポルトガル語".--
ネイ (
talk) 05:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
name = table.concat (language_list, '_,,_'); -- and concatenate with special-secret-separators
name = name:gsub ('_,,_([^_,]+)$', cfg.messages'parameter-final-separator' .. '%1'); -- replace last special-secret-separator with final separator
name = name:gsub ('_,,_', cfg.messages'parameter-separator']); -- replace all other special-secret-separators
_,,_
to appear in the language parameter input. If this could be added to the sandbox and synced later on, it would be great. (I do not prefer copying from a talk page or a sandbox page to our production module in another language)--
ネイ (
talk) 06:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
name = table.concat (language_list, cfg.messages'parameter-separator'], 1, code-1); -- concatenate all but last
name = table.concat ({name, language_listcode]}, cfg.messages'parameter-final-separator']); -- concatenate last with final separator
In the past, the bioRxiv DOI was concatenated from doi: 10.1101/123456 to bioRxiv 123456 with the understanding that 123456 was the identifier (and indeed was used in many URLs). However, the recent update to the biorxiv DOIs would mean this changes from doi: 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862 to bioRxiv 2020.02.07.937862 which really isn't clear, further obfuscates what is actually used by people, and loses the 'identity' of the biorxiv string as an identifier/pseudoidentifier. So I propose we show what should be clear to everyone
A simple AWB run (or
CitationCleanerBot (
talk ·
contribs) run) should be more than sufficient to make the updates from |biorxiv=123456
to |biorxiv=10.1101/123456
in a timely manner.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 18:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title".
bioRxiv
108712. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | "Title".
bioRxiv
108712. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/108712. |
Sandbox | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/108712. |
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title".
bioRxiv
2020.02.07.937862. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Sandbox | "Title".
bioRxiv
2020.02.07.937862. {{
cite bioRxiv}} : Check |biorxiv= value (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite biorxiv
|
---|---|
Live | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862. |
Sandbox | "Title". bioRxiv 10.1101/2020.02.07.937862. |
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 15:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Some websites provide incorrect information, and converting links to references with Citoid can result in invalid last or first names which are not currently flagged as errors by EXTRACT NAMES. Eg last2 = 2012 which is a year, or first = 11 January (a date part). I am unsure if it is ever valid for a last oe first name to contain digits, or have only digits. I suggest checking the content of author names and using the maintenance category to flag invalid ones. Amousey ( talk) 21:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Tweaks to the sandbox removed some nonsense and added maint cats when a name-holding parameter does not hold any letters:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=3}}
→ 3. Title. {{
cite book}}
: |last=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Black |first = 4}}
→ Black, 4. Title. {{
cite book}}
: |first=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Brown |translator=5,6.9}}
→ Brown. Title. Translated by 5,6.9. {{
cite book}}
: |translator=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |contribution=Contribution |contributor=1.2.3.4,(4-5) |author=Red}}
→ 1.2.3.4,(4-5). "Contribution". Title. By Red. {{
cite book}}
: |contributor=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |editor-last=?????}}
→ ????? (ed.). Title. {{
cite book}}
: |editor-last=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |editor-last=Orange |editor-first=3-4+5=?}}
→ Orange, 3-4+5=? (ed.). Title. {{
cite book}}
: |editor-first=
has numeric name (
help){{cite book/new |title=Title |interviewer=1 2 |author=Yellow |author2= }}
→ Yellow. Title. Interviewed by 1 2. {{
cite book}}
: |interviewer=
has numeric name (
help)Alphanumeric names not caught:
{{cite book/new |title=Title |contribution=Contribution |contributor=Green 9 |author=Blue |editor=:Violet: |translator=Gray=5}}
This change will create 5 new maint cats.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi! Could I get some help on translating {{ cite web}} to and from other languages in WP:CXT. When translating into Scots, for example, the cite web references come up as grayed out. The "issues" gives:
"Missing reference: A reference could not be transferred to the translation since it uses a template with a different structure.
Please, edit the reference in the translation to fill the missing information." It then gives a link to
Content translations/Templates. However, the template is identical for both languages.
How do I go about making these translate properly through the translation tool? Any ideas? I previously asked at WT:CXT. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 07:59, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
the template is identical for both languages, is there really an issue? Wouldn't a translator simply copy the template rather than attempt to translate it? Are you trying to translate cs1|2 templates that are inside
<ref>...</ref>
tags? If so, then see
mw:Content translation/Templates#Known issues.I propose to update cs1|2 module suite over the weekend 18–19 April 2020. Here are the changes:
character entity in page number lists;
discussionnone
keyword to ~/Configuration;
discussionModule:Citation/CS1/Configuration:
none
keywordModule:Citation/CS1/Whitelist:
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation:
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers:
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css:
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 19:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
An oversight on my part, none
is a keyword used in |postscript=
to suppress terminal punctuation, in |ref=
to suppress creation of an anchor ID, in |title=
({{
cite journal}}
and {{
citation}}
when |journal=
has a value) to suppress missing title errors, in |type=
to suppress automatic type annotation ({{
cite AV media notes}}
, {{
cite interview}}
, {{
cite mailinglist}}
, {{
cite map}}
, {{
cite podcast}}
, {{
cite pressrelease}}
, {{
cite report}}
, {{
cite techreport}}
, {{
cite thesis}}
)
{{cite thesis/new |author=Red |date=2020 |title=Title |ref=none |postscript=none |type=none}}
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-000000C9-QINU`"'<cite class="citation thesis cs1">Red (2020). ''Title''</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Adissertation&rft.title=Title&rft.date=2020&rft.au=Red&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+64" class="Z3988"></span>
{{cite journal/new |title=none |journal=Journal}}
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{citation/new |title=none |journal=Journal}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
none
to the keywords{}
table in
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox.
Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox uses the value in the table for the listed parameters. This allows other wikis to specify 'none' in their language.|author*=
parameters in order to indicate that a source does not specify an author. So far, the suggestion is to add a hidden HTML comment like <!-- Staff writer, no byline -->
, but since the exact wording is difficult to remember, this is not easily machine-readable. It would be better if the template would allow this condition to be specified explicitly through some symbolic value like 'none' so that we could issue a specific (centrally defined and maintained) placeholder text would we decide that this is more useful than not displaying anything at all in the future (or there could even be some alternative output format using CSS to make the display of such messages user-configurable).Because of this discussion, I've been having a go at rewriting Template:Citation Style documentation/author using the cs1 doc support code that I wrote to extract canonical and alias names from Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration. I have already done that for Template:Citation Style documentation/language but ~/author is a bit more difficult.
The doc support function function canonical_name_get (AuthorList-Last)
returns last# with a '#' enumerator place-holder character. I don't intend to change that because it's the number sign. Editors will copy parameter lists from template docs for use in articles. I have seen |lastn=<name>
in articles. Those uses were caught because the module sees that parameter name as invalid. Not so for |last#=
.
The module looks at incoming enumerated parameters and replaces the enumerator digits with the place-holder character: last26
→ last#
. Function validate()
then looks in the appropriate table in ~/Whitelist for a match to last#
and returns the assigned value if found, nil else.
But, when the incoming parameter is |last#=<name>
, the parameter appears to be one where the digits have already been replaced so validate()
finds last#
and returns the assigned value. Because last#
is not properly enumerated, its presence in a template is only detected by its absence in the final rendering. When last#
is the only name or is the last name of a list of names, it is not rendered so is only detected by the observant editor. When one of several names, but not the last name, then detected by the gap it causes in the listed names.
I have fixed this in the sandbox. It will be part of the imminent update.
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | One; Two. Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | One; Two. Title. {{
cite book}} : Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Wikitext | {{cite book
|
---|---|
Live | One; Three. Title. {{
cite book}} : Missing |author2= (
help); Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
Sandbox | One; Three. Title. {{
cite book}} : Missing |author2= (
help); Unknown parameter |last#= ignored (
help)
|
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 17:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#=url_and_=archiveurl_do_not_match -- Green C 14:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Any chance of {{ cite web}} having the ability to specify a mirror-url (as distinct from and separate from a true archive-url)? For example, in JMP (x86 instruction) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), the single current source is no longer available from Intel directly (a PDF reference file) at the url listed. However, I found an alternative mirrored version, but it doesn't feel "correct" to take over the primary url field as it's possible it is still available directly from Intel at a different url. Presumably if url-status was "dead" then the displayed url would go mirror-url (if non-null), then archive-url. Thoughts? — Locke Cole • t • c 06:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
|url=mirror_url
and also use |via=Mirror_Website_Title [mirror]
.
98.0.246.242 (
talk) 02:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
When links go to different web sites they are different citations, even though the site content might be the same. If you want to keep the original Intel link for whatever reason invoke the template two times. The |archive-url=
field is only meant for
web archive sites like archive.org and archive.today --
Green
C 04:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|url-status=dead
, and the document will be available from the archive. No problem. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|archive-url=
field. They are trying to make a primary URL into an archive URL. Both those URLs require a |work=
. --
Green
C 04:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
|url=
or use |archive-url=
as intended. You are not "usurping" someone's original URL if it no longer works. --
Izno (
talk) 14:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
|work=
(or |publisher=
), |date=
, |title=
, |archive-url=
, IDs etc.. the template is designed to cite a single website or source. You are trying to combine two websites into a single citation and this breaks the model. What happens if the mirror URL is at a different website (different |work=
field), published on a different |date=
, has a different |title=
, has a different |access-date=
and then the mirror dies and the archive bots try to archive it where do they put the archive URL? Do you suggest we also create parallel mirror arguments for all these fields? If you want to cite two websites invoke two copies of the template. --
Green
C 20:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
It breaks the design of the citation template. [...]... are you familiar with what a mirror site is? TL;dr: it's basically an archive, in fact it's actually better than some archives because there's usually no banner or indicator you're viewing something other than the original work. So all of those additional fields (work, publisher, title, etc.) are identical to the original content. Literally the only additional fields for this change would be
mirror-url=
and possibly mirror-status=
. Functionally, if url-status were set to dead and mirror-url was non-null (and, if implemented, mirror-url was also not dead) then mirror-url would be exposed to readers; if both fields are dead, only then would the archive be invoked. In all cases, the various additional fields you noted remain the same because they all point to the same things.. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 03:24, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|work=
and possibly other metadata getting out of sync (mirrors are not always exactly the same metadata); new maintenance and tracking category issues; bots have to be rewritten to deal with the new fields; no objective understanding for the community of what a mirror site is (eg. a Reuters story carried at both WaPo and NYT some people will see as a mirror of the content). Or, simply invoke two copies of the cite template. Or, simply replace the primary URL with the new URL at the mirror. BTW please do not put mirror URLs in the archive-url field as this creates link rot that bots can not fix/resolve, the |archive-url=
is for one of these:
Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia --
Green
C 05:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Your proposing all these extra fields [...]... two fields, actually.
[...] requiring significant code changes to deal with the interactions with other fields;As someone who used to edit templates rather regularly, I feel very confident in saying it's not actually that significant.
creating unresolvable link rot problems (what happens when the mirror URL dies)And this is in any way worse than the present situation? For web content that has a mirror site, this actually presents less issues, not more...
mismatched |work=
and possibly other metadata getting out of sync (mirrors are not always exactly the same metadata);
This is not a problem, as I already explained. None of those other fields "[get] out of sync" because they are identical to their original source.. they are a
mirror site.. bots have to be rewritten to deal with the new fields;Other than template syntax bots (if such things exist), I don't see a problem that is too burdensome to outweigh the advantages.
no objective understanding for the community of what a mirror site is (eg. a Reuters story carried at both WaPo and NYT some people will see as a mirror of the content)They, like you, could start by reading mirror site. It's at mirror site. Just click here if you want to learn what a mirror site is. Mirror site.
Or, simply invoke two copies of the cite template.And then watch as someone helpfully comes along later, not understanding the significance of the second identical source, and removes it. Brilliant!
Or, simply replace the primary URL with the new URL at the mirror.As I said above:
I don't think I was clear: while my current use was to maintain the original url but provide a mirrored url (since, at the time, it was believed a proper archive wasn't available), there is still a use going forward to provide mirror-url's before the original url dies (in addition to, not instead of, the usual archive-url). Not sure how else to explain that...
BTW please do not put mirror URLs in the archive-url field as this creates link rot that bots can not fix/resolve, the |archive-url=
is for one of these:
Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia
Golly, thanks. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 05:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|archive-url=
field (
"Golly, thanks"), assuming they even read the docs. --
Green
C 17:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
mirror-url
field I could have used instead, oh... right. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c 18:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)In Zhongguo wenxue shi there is an article from Chen Guoqiu that I wish to include in the further reading section as an additional resource about a book. It is important, in regards to Chinese and Japanese works, to include the name in the native script of the author and of the title alongside romanized forms of both and/or the translation of the title - Giovanni Vitello does that in his citation in his journal article for a reason. However I am not sure in this citation template how to include those in separate parameters. If there is an "author-nativescript" or "title-nativescript" and/or "title-romanization" I would like to have those fields. These would also help with "editor", "chapter", "work", and "newspaper" parameters too.
Thanks, WhisperToMe ( talk) 22:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
|script-title=
, |script-chapter=
, |script-work=
, |script-newspaper=
, and others; these are documented at the various templates.script-
variants of the name-holding parameters.script-
parameters for names would be used if we are using Chinese sources, which I see more common for BLPs for our local artists as we have invariably more artists in the Chinese medium. I would also see this happening if more of us Singapore-based editors start to dive into the history of Singapore, pulling out articles from non English-mediums like Chinese newspapers from the archives at
https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/.
robertsky (
talk) 03:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
script-
variants of the name-holding parameters would be very useful in Japanese sourcing as there are often (almost always) multiple ways to write a name. For a given name example, see
Hiroyuki. While not as common for surnames, there are still often 2-3 ways to write many of them. ···
日本穣 ·
投稿 ·
Talk to Nihonjoe ·
Join WP Japan! 08:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)|script-author/editor*=
and |script-publisher=
variants:|script-series=
:Hi guys, I'm using the cite book template, and sometimes, within an article, I need to cite different pages of the same book, in different parts of the article. One way to do this is to have each page as a different reference. But that would entail creating several different references in the same article, all with the same information about the same book repeated many times, and only the page number parameter would be different in each instance. I imagine there must be a smarter way to do this. Could anyone please let me know? Thanks! Dr. Vogel ( talk) 20:38, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
|ref=harv
to the template. For the subsequent references, I use {{
harvp}}. So it looks something like:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)<ref>...</ref>
, those references aren't included with the others when isolating the references via the various scripts for that purpose. Others' mileage may vary on that issue though.
Imzadi 1979
→ 04:19, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
is not in <ref>...</ref>
tags? Here is the output of your {{harvp|Barnett|2004|p=226|ps=.}}
rewritten as {{sfnp|Barnett|2004|p=226|ps=.}}
:
<ref name="FOOTNOTEBarnett2004226">[[#CITEREFBarnett2004|Barnett (2004)]], p. 226.</ref>
<ref>...</ref>
tags and presents them in textboxes for ease of editing". The second at
User:PleaseStand/segregate-refs.js is the one I use more though because it creates a second edit window below the main one with all of the footnotes listed sequentially and applies temporary names to all of the unnamed references in the body text, allowing me to work with the main text and the footnotes separately but at the same time. (The first replaces the main editing box with the individual text boxes for each footnote.) Both of these scripts ignore {{
sfnp}} and its brethren because sfnp is not enclosed in <ref>...</ref>
within the wikicode. (They also ignore templates like {{
inflation-fn}}, but because that is such a single-purpose it doesn't hamper editing the same way.)
Imzadi 1979
→ 15:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
|pages=
[1] instead of |page=
[1] and provide a comma-separated list of pages or page ranges there:Has there been discussion on how to handle a Subtitle of a book? I just want to make sure I'm doing it right. I can't find anything in the MOS or Template:Cite book that provides direction. I'd love it if there was an actual parameter for it in the template, but I'd appreciate even some guidelines on how to display the title vs subtitle. Thanks. Canute ( talk) 16:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
|sub-title=
parameter would be useful (as is done in citation templates in some other Wikipedias).|title=
parameter.|title-separator=
. Since valid separators can be more than one character (including leading and/or trailing spaces), the way to specify different separators would need some more thought (but is doable) to remain intuitive and easy to use.|title-separator=
is used, its argument will be used as separator with a space appended, so |title-separator=:
would result in ": ", |title-separator=,
in ", ", and |title-separator=string
in "string ".|title-separator=
could be used to override the separator as before, but with one special case: |title-separator=–
or |title-separator=-
would result in " – " rather than "– " (so that users would not have to resort to for this common case).This error is popping up today, as seen on the Warren Street tube station article:
Thanks!
Slambo
(Speak) 13:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Resolves to the wrong link, https://doi.org/10.1101/10.1101/F355933 instead of the correct https://doi.org/10.1101/355933. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 17:05, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
The first "cite thesis" entry on African humid period#External links is producing "thesis thesis" in the displayed text. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 20:36, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
I've opened a discussion on how to make the RefToolbars work with the new Harv mode of the templates, here, in case any of the template maintainers has opinions. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 12:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
I know, not the normal use of a help talk page, but since this one is essentially the CS1/CS2 maintenance noticeboard and presumably watchlisted by all the people who maintain them: Thanks for changing the templates so that I no longer have to type out |ref=harv
when using the RefToolbar & {{
sfn}}.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk) 20:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)