This template had become inconsistent with {{
sfn}} following updates to the latter not made here: adding |ps=
, altering the handling of |loc=
when |p=
or |p=
are present. I think I've fixed this now, but it's not the proper solution.
Given the commonality in markup for the author-date templates, I have developed a meta-template at {{ Harvard citation/core}}. See Template talk:Sfn#Core update. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 01:39, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Done ---—
Gadget850 (Ed)
talk
16:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I propose that this template is moved to template:sfnb "parentheses" is not commonly used in British English and the name would be a better fit with the other template in this series that mentions brackets: {{ harvnb}}. -- PBS ( talk) 08:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
, where it has that meaning. Of course the abbreviations used by the two are inconsistent, as Peter coxhead has pointed out, but an appearance of consistency with opposite meanings is somewhat worse.
Kanguole
20:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
harv}}
templates had been written using "p" instead of "b" (eg {{
harvnp}}
, then I think it would be reasonable to argue that this template ought to be under sfnp, however I do not see that sfnb is any more likely to be misunderstood than {{
sfnp}}
and -- to borrow some ideas from the article title policy -- that given the other templates in the family, {{
sfnp}}
is not an extension "that editors would naturally" look for and {{
sfnb}}
is more "consistent" with the other templates than {{
sfnp}}
. The confusion with an interpretation of sfnb sf-nb is really a problem (in which case the problem also arises with "sf-np". then an alternative would be to move it to "sfn-b" --
PBS (
talk)
09:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
that is wrong.
Kanguole
14:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)Ideally, the "harv" and the "sfn" templates would have parallel names. However:
{{
harvtxt}}
and {{
sfnp}}
/{{
sfnb}}
produce output like "Smith (2010)"{{
harvnb}}
and {{
sfn}}
produce output like "Smith 2010"{{
harv}}
, which might be expected to parallel the unqualified {{
sfn}}
, produces output like "(Smith 2010)"I find this confusing, and I regularly use these templates. It must be even more confusing to those who encounter them rarely. Peter coxhead ( talk) 10:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
|p=25
, {{
harvtxt}}
produces "
Smith (2010, p. 25)", while this template produces "
Smith (2010), p. 25" (which I think is appropriate for short references).
Kanguole
12:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
and a few refs are later added which use {{
harvtxt}}
, the latter should be amended to match the former.{{
sfnp}}
is not an exact parallel to {{
harvtxt}}
.{{
sfnp}}
, and you want to put more than one short reference in the same footnote, but using the same style, e.g. "<ref>
Smith (2010), p. 25;
Jones (2008), p. 56.</ref>". Currently there's no template to do that, but if the article were using {{
sfn}}
, you could use {{
harvnb}}
. (This was first raised
here.)
Kanguole
23:33, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
twice? That's what
Lamberhurst (
talk ·
contribs) has been doing at
Human rights in the United Kingdom - see e.g. most of the refs from [30] to [46] inclusive, and I fully agree with that technique. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
23:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{sfnp}}
without the <ref></ref>
tags—in fact, if we just had that something, and let {{sfnp}}
delegate to it for the ref content, we'd be all set. --
SlothMcCarty (
talk)
02:07, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
harvtxt}}
and is
one of a group of templates which offer varying layouts. If the differing position of the closing parenthesis is a real problem, it can be discussed and perhaps adjusted, there is no need to create a new template just for that variation. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
10:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
a hundred times, then you want to make a ref with any additional content, all the straightforward options create an inconsistency of format. And it would be so easy just to have {{
sfnp}}
just wrap <ref> tags around another template. --
SlothMcCarty (
talk)
04:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)|page=
is supposed to be a synonym for |p=
. Mostly this works, but it's mis-merging cites to different pages as if they were to the same page.
[1] breaks.
{{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|page=36}}
[1] and {{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|page=48}}
[2] find themselves merged thus:
References
[2] works around it. Uses |p=
rather than |page=
.
{{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|p=36}}
and {{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|p=48}}
May affect {{ sfn}} too, but I've not checked. Andy Dingley ( talk) 16:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
References
{{
sfn}}
. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This would be less obtuse, and less apt to see |ps=none
removed, if it could be specified as, and was documented as |dot=none
. The problem with |ps=none
(or worse yet |ps=
alone) is that it implies, to anyone who is not well-steeped in this particular set of templates "this is a redundant parameter indicating there is no footnote, so feel free to delete it". Having |dot=none
would more clearly imply "this is suppression of a character". Could also call it |period=none
or |stop=none
, but whatever. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
21:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
|ps=none
is to produce short citations consistent with CS2-style full citations, so why not use |mode=cs2
?
Peter coxhead (
talk)
08:45, 19 September 2015 (UTC){{
harvp|Foo|2018}}
has the obvious expected behaviour:
Foo (2018)
{{
sfnp|Foo|May 2018}}
though does this:
Foo & May 2018
Although this is something of an exceptional case, there are cases of multiple cites to successive issues of a periodical where it would be clearer to allow dates (not just years) within the parentheses. Why does {{ sfnp}} analyse the content anyway, rather than just wrapping the last param? Andy Dingley ( talk) 21:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
{{{2}}}
–{{{5}}}
) is expected to be publication year. It has been ever thus. There is minimal analysis because the content of the last positional parameter directs how the template will render the preceding positional parameters:
{{harvp|Foo|2018}}
→
Foo (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|2018}}
→
Foo & Bar (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|2018}}
→
Foo, Bar & Baz (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|Qux|2018}}
→
Foo et al. (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|Qux}}
→
Foo et al. – {{{4}}}
not year so no brackets|date=
or |year=
parameter of the cs1|2 template and the same disambiguator in the matching harv or sfn templates:
{{cite journal |last=Foo |date=May 2018a |title=Title |ref=harv}}
– {{harvp|Foo|2018a}}
{{harv}}
and {{sfnx}}
templates expect to link to cs1|2 templates that are have CITEREF
anchors in the form:
CITEREFNamenYYYYa
where
Namen
is the unspaced concatenation of the citation's |last1=
–|lastn=
where n shall be no more than 4YYYY
is the 3- or 4-digit year from cs1|2 |date=
or |year=
or, when both are used, from |year=
a
is a single lowercase alpha disambiguator{{
sfnp|Foo (May 2018)}}
:
Foo (May 2018) and simply abandoned the multiple params.
Andy Dingley (
talk)
08:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC){{harv}}
and {{sfn}}
family of templates accept:
n.d.
and nd
c. YYY
or c. YYYY
YYYY–YYYY
{{harv}}
and {{sfn}}
family of templates are following the de facto 'style'. The question about whether en.wiki should lead the charge for change is, I think, outside the scope of this template talk page backwater.Please see Module_talk:Footnotes#consolidating_and_abandoning_Template:Harvard_citation/core.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 16:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Module talk:Footnotes § broken harv link reporting where a broken harv-link reporting scheme is proposed.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 17:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
This template causes duplicate reference definitions when used with different parameters. For example, one reference might plainly use {{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300}}
, while another might reference the same item but provide a quotation: {{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300|ps="Blah blah blah."}}
. Such an arrangement results in "Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEJones2022300" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page)."
How can this error be avoided? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 16:26, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
emits:
{{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300}}
:
{{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300|ps="Blah blah blah."}}
You are invited to join the discussion at
Module talk:Footnotes § loc, at.
Rjjiii (
talk)
02:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
This template had become inconsistent with {{
sfn}} following updates to the latter not made here: adding |ps=
, altering the handling of |loc=
when |p=
or |p=
are present. I think I've fixed this now, but it's not the proper solution.
Given the commonality in markup for the author-date templates, I have developed a meta-template at {{ Harvard citation/core}}. See Template talk:Sfn#Core update. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 01:39, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Done ---—
Gadget850 (Ed)
talk
16:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I propose that this template is moved to template:sfnb "parentheses" is not commonly used in British English and the name would be a better fit with the other template in this series that mentions brackets: {{ harvnb}}. -- PBS ( talk) 08:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
, where it has that meaning. Of course the abbreviations used by the two are inconsistent, as Peter coxhead has pointed out, but an appearance of consistency with opposite meanings is somewhat worse.
Kanguole
20:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
harv}}
templates had been written using "p" instead of "b" (eg {{
harvnp}}
, then I think it would be reasonable to argue that this template ought to be under sfnp, however I do not see that sfnb is any more likely to be misunderstood than {{
sfnp}}
and -- to borrow some ideas from the article title policy -- that given the other templates in the family, {{
sfnp}}
is not an extension "that editors would naturally" look for and {{
sfnb}}
is more "consistent" with the other templates than {{
sfnp}}
. The confusion with an interpretation of sfnb sf-nb is really a problem (in which case the problem also arises with "sf-np". then an alternative would be to move it to "sfn-b" --
PBS (
talk)
09:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
harvnb}}
that is wrong.
Kanguole
14:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)Ideally, the "harv" and the "sfn" templates would have parallel names. However:
{{
harvtxt}}
and {{
sfnp}}
/{{
sfnb}}
produce output like "Smith (2010)"{{
harvnb}}
and {{
sfn}}
produce output like "Smith 2010"{{
harv}}
, which might be expected to parallel the unqualified {{
sfn}}
, produces output like "(Smith 2010)"I find this confusing, and I regularly use these templates. It must be even more confusing to those who encounter them rarely. Peter coxhead ( talk) 10:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
|p=25
, {{
harvtxt}}
produces "
Smith (2010, p. 25)", while this template produces "
Smith (2010), p. 25" (which I think is appropriate for short references).
Kanguole
12:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
and a few refs are later added which use {{
harvtxt}}
, the latter should be amended to match the former.{{
sfnp}}
is not an exact parallel to {{
harvtxt}}
.{{
sfnp}}
, and you want to put more than one short reference in the same footnote, but using the same style, e.g. "<ref>
Smith (2010), p. 25;
Jones (2008), p. 56.</ref>". Currently there's no template to do that, but if the article were using {{
sfn}}
, you could use {{
harvnb}}
. (This was first raised
here.)
Kanguole
23:33, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
twice? That's what
Lamberhurst (
talk ·
contribs) has been doing at
Human rights in the United Kingdom - see e.g. most of the refs from [30] to [46] inclusive, and I fully agree with that technique. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
23:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
{{sfnp}}
without the <ref></ref>
tags—in fact, if we just had that something, and let {{sfnp}}
delegate to it for the ref content, we'd be all set. --
SlothMcCarty (
talk)
02:07, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
harvtxt}}
and is
one of a group of templates which offer varying layouts. If the differing position of the closing parenthesis is a real problem, it can be discussed and perhaps adjusted, there is no need to create a new template just for that variation. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
10:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
a hundred times, then you want to make a ref with any additional content, all the straightforward options create an inconsistency of format. And it would be so easy just to have {{
sfnp}}
just wrap <ref> tags around another template. --
SlothMcCarty (
talk)
04:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)|page=
is supposed to be a synonym for |p=
. Mostly this works, but it's mis-merging cites to different pages as if they were to the same page.
[1] breaks.
{{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|page=36}}
[1] and {{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|page=48}}
[2] find themselves merged thus:
References
[2] works around it. Uses |p=
rather than |page=
.
{{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|p=36}}
and {{
sfnp|Beckett|1984|p=48}}
May affect {{ sfn}} too, but I've not checked. Andy Dingley ( talk) 16:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
References
{{
sfn}}
. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This would be less obtuse, and less apt to see |ps=none
removed, if it could be specified as, and was documented as |dot=none
. The problem with |ps=none
(or worse yet |ps=
alone) is that it implies, to anyone who is not well-steeped in this particular set of templates "this is a redundant parameter indicating there is no footnote, so feel free to delete it". Having |dot=none
would more clearly imply "this is suppression of a character". Could also call it |period=none
or |stop=none
, but whatever. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
21:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
|ps=none
is to produce short citations consistent with CS2-style full citations, so why not use |mode=cs2
?
Peter coxhead (
talk)
08:45, 19 September 2015 (UTC){{
harvp|Foo|2018}}
has the obvious expected behaviour:
Foo (2018)
{{
sfnp|Foo|May 2018}}
though does this:
Foo & May 2018
Although this is something of an exceptional case, there are cases of multiple cites to successive issues of a periodical where it would be clearer to allow dates (not just years) within the parentheses. Why does {{ sfnp}} analyse the content anyway, rather than just wrapping the last param? Andy Dingley ( talk) 21:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
{{{2}}}
–{{{5}}}
) is expected to be publication year. It has been ever thus. There is minimal analysis because the content of the last positional parameter directs how the template will render the preceding positional parameters:
{{harvp|Foo|2018}}
→
Foo (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|2018}}
→
Foo & Bar (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|2018}}
→
Foo, Bar & Baz (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|Qux|2018}}
→
Foo et al. (2018){{harvp|Foo|Bar|Baz|Qux}}
→
Foo et al. – {{{4}}}
not year so no brackets|date=
or |year=
parameter of the cs1|2 template and the same disambiguator in the matching harv or sfn templates:
{{cite journal |last=Foo |date=May 2018a |title=Title |ref=harv}}
– {{harvp|Foo|2018a}}
{{harv}}
and {{sfnx}}
templates expect to link to cs1|2 templates that are have CITEREF
anchors in the form:
CITEREFNamenYYYYa
where
Namen
is the unspaced concatenation of the citation's |last1=
–|lastn=
where n shall be no more than 4YYYY
is the 3- or 4-digit year from cs1|2 |date=
or |year=
or, when both are used, from |year=
a
is a single lowercase alpha disambiguator{{
sfnp|Foo (May 2018)}}
:
Foo (May 2018) and simply abandoned the multiple params.
Andy Dingley (
talk)
08:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC){{harv}}
and {{sfn}}
family of templates accept:
n.d.
and nd
c. YYY
or c. YYYY
YYYY–YYYY
{{harv}}
and {{sfn}}
family of templates are following the de facto 'style'. The question about whether en.wiki should lead the charge for change is, I think, outside the scope of this template talk page backwater.Please see Module_talk:Footnotes#consolidating_and_abandoning_Template:Harvard_citation/core.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 16:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Module talk:Footnotes § broken harv link reporting where a broken harv-link reporting scheme is proposed.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 17:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
This template causes duplicate reference definitions when used with different parameters. For example, one reference might plainly use {{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300}}
, while another might reference the same item but provide a quotation: {{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300|ps="Blah blah blah."}}
. Such an arrangement results in "Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEJones2022300" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page)."
How can this error be avoided? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 16:26, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
{{
sfnp}}
emits:
{{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300}}
:
{{sfnp|Jones|2022|p=300|ps="Blah blah blah."}}
You are invited to join the discussion at
Module talk:Footnotes § loc, at.
Rjjiii (
talk)
02:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)