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 1 | Archive 2 |
Could the template be expanded to produce something more akin to {{ cite web}} or {{ cite news}} i.e. including access date, link to the London Gazette and HMSO articles? I've added Gazette references to a number of pages (e.g. Peterborough, New towns in the United Kingdom and various honour/decoration related articles) either use straight external links, or the cite templates. This could be a good alternative, but in it's present form wouldn't be compatible with the cite series which I tend to use for other references within an article.
I think there may have been a slight change to the format of url that the Gazette website is using for supplements, now seem to have just "&type=Supplement" not "&type=ArchivedSupplement". There may be other changes too. David Underdown 13:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to move the Gazette date out of the hyperlink to the the Gazette issue. This would allow the date to have wikilinks placed around it to enable user preferences for dates (may even be possible to handle this automatically, I'm not sure). David Underdown 11:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Using Special:linksearch it appears that there are over 150 articles linking to the London Gazette in the old format url (all now broken of course), see http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Linksearch&target=www.gazette-online.co.uk&namespace=&limit=250&offset=0 Some others are using the new format, but not the template, and others just link to the Gazette Online homepage and probably could be fixed to point to a specific issue. I'll try and work through some of these from time to time, but it will take a while. David Underdown 13:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I've just been updating the London Gazette links on John Capper to use the template (since the existing ones were the old style urls), and the third use of the template doesn't seem to be rendering correctly for no reason that I can work out - the url and the link title are both visible on the page, along with the square brackets. Any ideas? David Underdown 12:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I think it would be useful if one could quote from the gazette in the reference. Could we have an optional parameter as per {{ Cite web}} which allows for
{{#if: {{{quote|}}} | “{{{quote}}}” }}
Any objections? -- Matilda talk 22:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible to use ref name with the template? I'm getting "Cite error: Invalid ref tag; name cannot be a simple integer. Use a descriptive title" when I try to. Any suggestions? Craigy ( talk) 09:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
For those who have searched the LG for the past few years and found that 1985 hasn't been searchable since (like I have), I have just received a reply from someone at the LG who has said that 1985 has recently been transcribed and should be available by December 2008 at the latest. Craigy ( talk) 11:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
An issue arising from the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Neil Hamilton Fairley/archive1:
My understanding is that it does not appear because what you actually get is a page of which a frame is a PDF. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
As an experiment, I started to proofread issue 19345 and 19346 (both from January 1836) on Wikisource. If this effort turns out to make any sense, we could have many years of work ahead. Is there any favorite issue or date to try next? -- LA2 ( talk) 05:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
If both the linkeddate
and date
parameters are missing, the template displays both a comma and a period as the closing punctuation. This is easy enough to fix, but should it just be shortened to a period, or should I add a check to the error box for the date parameters? Based on the template documentation, I'm thinking adding it to the error box is probably the way to go. –
RobinHood70
talk 18:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
date/linkeddate
as a required parameter to this template. Please note that this will produce errors where none showed before, however I believe the template documentation makes it fairly clear that date
should always be included. If this behaviour is significantly disruptive, it can be removed if there's a pressing demand, but the better option is probably to fix those articles where the errors occur so that dates are included. –
RobinHood70
talk 21:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Can someone with the know-how please introduce a parameter to allow users to delink London Gazette when they use this template? I understand some users like to have wikilinks in their references, but it really shouldn't be repeated after the first use. Apterygial talk 11:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
nolink=1
and it will not be linked. –
RobinHood70
talk 21:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)I created an index to the London Gazette, some time ago (which allows you to find the issue number from the date). I linked to it from the /doc page, but thought I might mention it here too.
Wikipedia:London Gazette Index.
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC).
There is a type of London Gazette entry called a "notice", for example http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/55222/notices/4SI - would it be worth adding capability for these? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 21:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
In all of Wikipedia there is a consistent style that holds true for all links. Except, apparently, for the links produced by this template.
These two cites give roughly the same information. The first is produced by {{
London Gazette}}
and the second by a misused {{
cite news}}
template. The order of output is a bit different but the important part is what is missing from the {{London Gazette}}
template output. What is missing is external link icon. Because every external link in WP has that icon, I was surprised at the unexpected output of the {{London Gazette}}
template.
Thought you should know in case you'd like to fix it.
-- Trappist the monk ( talk) 03:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
{{
LondonGazette}}
offers.<frame name="pdf" onload="trackView();" src="/issues/29169/pages/4894/page.pdf" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="1" />
/issues/29169/pages/4894/page.pdf
( ←) Just so it's clear, the "change" wasn't something I actively did, it was more of a passive choice. By removing the "plainlinks" class, that left only the older "PDFlink" class, which is what's showing the PDF icon. It'll take all of about two seconds to remove that as well if desired, but I really have no opinion on whether the link is appropriate for a PDF in a frame or not. I'll be watching this page, though, so if the decision is to remove it, once I notice, I'll make the change if another template-savvy person doesn't beat me to it. Edit: Oops, looks like David already said something similar above—I missed it at first. – RobinHood70 talk 02:50, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible to display supplement numbers where supplied? At present, filling in the supp field just displays supplement - this is fine where there is only one supplement (in which case the LG usually doesn't number it), but in numbers of cases there are multiple supplements which are numbered. Proper text citation should include this detail. My suggestion would be to modify the template so that if a number X is included in this field, it generates (Supplement X), with the behaviour remaining otherwise unchanged from the status quo.
Additionally, would it be possible to add a flag that allows the citation to display in an abbreviated format, eg: LG 31086(S3):15151–15162icon. 27 Dec 1918. Access 23 Jun 2012. Dates formatting would still be derived from what was input by the editor. Allowing a condensed format will be useful for a resource index that I am starting to compile (in a sortable table) for Mil History and Orders/Decorations/Medals editors and will allow editors flexibility in citation style in other appropriate contexts. The suggested format includes moving the supplement number to after the issue number - this prevents sorting issues when using in a sortable table. AusTerrapin ( talk) 18:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
|supp=
parameter doesn't just alter the display, it also alters the URL. Taking the example of the previous section, compare these:
{{
London Gazette|issue=29169|startpage=4894|date=21 May 1915|accessdate=16 November 2009}}
→
"No. 29169".
The London Gazette. 21 May 1915.{{
London Gazette|issue=29169|startpage=4894|date=21 May 1915|accessdate=16 November 2009|supp=yes}}
→
"No. 29169".
The London Gazette (invalid |supp=
(
help)). 21 May 1915.|supp=
parameter formats the URL. Do different supplements have different forms of URL?|supp=
is treated the same as |supp=yes
, even |supp=no
. I think that we should get all this cleaned up before we look at altering the effect of |supp=
. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
/pages/
is replaced with /supplements/
. The rest of the url is otherwise the same for both, although the page numbering in supplements starts at 1 each time and does not run in sequence with the normal gazettes which continue from edition to edition and only restart at the beginning of a year. If a supplement number is required to be shown, this would be simplest to implement using an additional parameter (say |suppnum
).--
DavidCane (
talk) 20:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
|supp=
is blank or absent, it's not a supplement; if it's filled in with anything, even |supp=no
, it is assumed to be a supplement.|notarchive=
parameter puts the page into
Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters. I fixed up a lot of |supp=n
last year (
example), but by no means all. Only when all uses of |supp=
are "clean" can we start using the parameter for a variant purpose. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)I've added a "ps" parameter to allow suppression of the trailing period, for compatibility with the {{ citation}} template. It would be good if someone with more knowledge and experience of the WikiMedia parser extensions than I have checks over what I've done though. Malleus Fatuorum 01:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
{{#if: {{{ps|}}} | {{{ps}}} | . }}
? Or if you don't want the period, use {{#if: {{{ps|}}} | {{{ps}}} }}
.
Debresser (
talk) 06:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please edit the template to ensure that the output of the gazettes' names is rendered in line with the wiki/official names, that is to say, with the "The" as part of the title viz: 'The London Gazette', 'The Edinburgh Gazette', 'The Belfast Gazette'. Thank you. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 04:46, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
|nolink=
is set to yes and therefore the link to
The London Gazette isn't made then the display in the citation is just London Gazette still. As long as the display name is the same regardless of the setting of |nolink=
then I have no objection.
NtheP (
talk) 17:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The London Gazette has recently launched a new beta website, using the new url http://www.thegazette.co.uk/ - this will also incorporate the Belfast and Edinburgh publications. The end of the url will remain the same (ie issue/nnnnnnn/[pages/supplements]/mmmm) but the London Gazette urls will begin http://www.thegazette.co.uk/london (and so on for Belfast and Edinburgh - I haven't checked the earliest editions to see if Oxford is used). The existing urls will work for now but will eventually be replaced by ones in this form. David Underdown ( talk) 16:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
This template is utterly user-unfriendly. As a fairly experienced editor, I have no idea
how to fix this, and hope someone can or will.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk) 14:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Should we move to Template:The Gazette (UK) following the website rebrand? D B D 16:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
The template has now completely stopped working, presumably because of the tinkering with the Gazette's website. I don't have the technical expertise to fix this. Anyone who does, please feel free. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/33000/pages/8957
. Presumably, Edinburgh and Belfast gazettes are similarly structured.The Gazette appears to have changed their website and the way in which issues appear, [3], so this template will need to change to adjust to it.-- Tærkast ( Discuss) 10:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi. What is the link between the parameters called "Notice ID" and "Notice code" on the Gazette website, and the ones specified in the WP template (|issue=
and the like)? Specifically, if I want to link to
[4] using {{
London Gazette}}, what should I enter in the template fields? Thanks!
It Is Me Here
t /
c 19:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The template currently provides a link to one page only of a LG issue (the endpage value only affects the link text). To see further pages, one has to click forward or back and wait for the site to respond. But the site permits a URL such as
http://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/55710, without a page number. This produces a PDF of all pages of the issue, so that one can scroll up and down without having to wait for the site. Would it be useful to make this feature available via the template, if only for use in the many honours list pages (
Template:Honours Lists)?
Stanning (
talk) 14:10, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette/sandbox}}
to do this, but have not tested it yet. {{
London Gazette/test cases}}
will need cases with various combinations of startpage and endpage, supplement specified (correctly and incorrectly) and not specified (correctly and incorrectly). Note that this makes "startpage" no longer mandatory. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 15:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC).Would just like to know which date should be used if linked to a supplement of an issue: the date the supplement was published or the date when the issue itself was published? Thanks. -- Re5x ( talk) 17:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
I suppose I could just start using cite news or cite web instead, but the lack of a quote parameter for this template was driving me crazy. I have been playing around in the sandbox, and I think that I've managed to get it working. Would anyone care to have a look? -- tronvillain ( talk) 15:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
There is a problem in the template language with nested constructs like {{#if:{{{startpage|{{{page|{{{pages|{{{2|
which used to bite people when coding the old {{
cite book}}
templates before
LUA was implemented. If someone writes a wapper around a template in this case lets call it {{
son of LG}}
the code will typically have within it:
{{son of LG |startpage={{{startpage|}}} .... }}
This means that as above the if statement will fail because startpage
exists but is empty and so page
is never tested. Here is an example to show it.
It is to avoid this possible scripting problem with an if statement that usually works for direct calls to a template, but usually fails when called from a wrapper template that I usually write in wrapper templates a construct like this:
|{{#if:{{{startpage|}}} |startpage |HIDE_PARAMETER}}={{{startpage|}}}
and why I want LUA module for citations to support a null parameter/sink (similar to a null device on a Unix system), as it would allow the dummy HIDE_PARAMETER to be replaced with null). -- PBS ( talk) 12:19, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Before the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 took effect in 1752, the year in Great Britain officially started on Lady Day, 25 March. This is reflected in the Gazette dates, so issue no. 9042, 19–23 March 1750, is followed by issue no. 9043, 23–26 March 1751. The convention when giving dates between 1 January and 24 March for years before 1752 is to note that they are Old Style, or to give the year as 1750/1. Since the recent changes the template now doesn't like this, and gives a red error message to Check date values e.g. here. In that list of references is a Gazette with a date range spanning more than one month, which the template doesn't seem to like either. Opera hat ( talk) 18:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
{{London Gazette|nolink=y|issue=9359|startpage=2|date=30 March – 2 April 1754}}
{{{London Gazette |issue=6253|page=1 |date=4 January 1723/1724}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)|date=
without error. Here, dates quoted from each of your examples and rewritten using the template:
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)writing about historical events. With this template, we are not
writing about historical events; we are citing a document which itself writes its own issue dates in single-year form. At the Gazette's website, we can view facsimiles of these documents; the website uses a single-year issue-date. Were I searching through the paper originals, I would not be looking for double-year form issue dates because that form of issue date does not occur in the sources.
writing about [an] historical [event]so it would be proper to use OSNS date forms in our writing. But that is not the purpose or function of this template. Dates in this template should reflect as closely as possible, within the constraints of cs1|2, the issue date that we get from the issue.
This template collects pages that use deprecated parameters in
Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with deprecated parameters. Currently only |ps=
is declared as deprecated. I would suggest that there are a few other parameters that should also be deprecated:
|separator=
– in cs1|2 the functionality of this parameter is handled by |mode=
which is supported by this template|startpage=
and |endpage=
– the sandbox version of the template has support for the standard cs1|2 parameters |page=
and |pages=
making |startpage=
and |endpage=
superfluous|accessdate=
and |access-date=
– this template links to archived facsimiles of Gazette pages. Those pages will not change; the wrapping html page may change, but the facsimile will not. |accessdate=
and |access-date=
are intended to mark a point in time when the content of an ephemeral web page supported text in a Wikipedia article. The archived Gazette facsimile is not ephemeral even though the wrapping html page may be. If an editor at Wikipedia is citing the content of the wrapping html page, then this template is not the correct template and the editor would be better served by using {{
cite web}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
|access-date=
and |accessdate=
.Any reason to not update the live template from the sandbox?
I've got an AWB script that will fix the deprecated parameters which can go to WP:BRFA after the template and its documentation are updated.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
{{
Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae}}
where I removed the use of startpage and endpage (replacing them with page or pages), and then altered the script so only page or pages can be used. The regular expression logic was quite easy: Look for every instance where there was startpage ... endpage pair, or endpaage ... startpage pair, and replace with pages, replace the remaining startpage with page. --
PBS (
talk)|supp=
error messages. These are easily discovered with an appropriate search string like "(invalid |supp= (help)".|startpage = {{{page|}}}
to |page={{{page|}}}
.I have rewritten the template as a wrapper around {{
cite news}}
.
I have made sure that all the current parameters are supported and that the tests for issue and date are maintained.
Changes:
{{
cite news}}
— I see this as an advantage as it will be similar to other in-line cations within an article.separator
parameter used to support any character will now only support comma and dot. This is inline with the current standard templates that no longer supports "separator" but set the separator character by the mode parameter (see below)ps
is still supported but so is standard named "postscript
parameter. However the default depends on the mode setting and is not set in the template.unnamed parameter 1
if fixed. Prior to the changes the value was not trimmed of any trailing spaces. This used to break the url by putting terminating spaces in it. This caused the url to link to the start of the issue and display the remainder of the url as part of the identifier on the page.I have added some new parameters:
{{sfn|Gazette|18903|p=259}}
or something similar.
Higher up this page there is a section #Unfriendly template where there is a complain that the code. I think that my changes simplify it, or at least it moves the complicated code into discrete sections. There is also several requests for a quotation parameter the last being in the section #Quote personally I do not think it is needed (as I always put the quote first and then add the citation), but it is now trivial to add the parameter to the code (if someone wants to do it):
|quote={{{quote|}}}
-- PBS ( talk) 20:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if {{
cite magazine}}
would be a better choice because of how that template handles |issue=
. Also, I think that the parenthetical supplement annotation prefixed to issue is in the wrong place and it looks bad. When the issue number is used in lieu of a title I think that the 'no.' prefix should be 'No.' I've changed the sandbox to use {{cite magazine}}
and to place the supplement annotation in |type=
.
These use |supp=
:
|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919.|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919. – sandboxand these don't:
It also seems to me that the value assigned to |supp=
should be changed so that it is meaningful. Instead of being used as a boolean operator, where any text simply forces the template to add the supplement annotation, we might change the template so that when |supp=
has a value other than 'y
', that value modifies the supplement annotation:
|supp=y
→
The London Gazette (Supplement).|supp=Fourth
→
The London Gazette (Fourth Supplement).— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=<whatever content>
to |supp=y
before implementation. Were the awb task clever, |supp=1
would be changed to |supp=First
.|supp=
will alter the URL from .../page/...
to .../supplement/...
, and I know of no other valid URL formats. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 14:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919.|supp=<anything>
modifies the target url (and adds the supplement annotation as I have already described). This is why I suggested that it would be necessary to do an awb run through these templates to change |supp=<anything>
to |supp=y
so that we can then use the sandbox change to modify how the supplement annotation renders.{{
cite newspaper}}
, not because I think it is the best choice, but because the Gazette is a newspaper and using a standard citation template was better that what came previously. So if you want to change it to another standard citation template I have no objection.|supp=1
because 1
equates to yes, true. There are some 8k |supp=yes
so I've tweaked the sandbox to allow that usage along with |supp=y
.{{
cite magazine}}
, than it does under current {{
cite news}}
, so I am in favour of making the change, even if it is decided not to go with numbered supp=.There was a problem with the new code. As I mentioned above there is an inconsistency in the Gazette database. Sometimes the creators of that page hierarchy do not include supplement in the url to a supplement eg. "Supplement to The London Gazette of Tuesday 11 of July" does not use
supplement in the link to the Gazette archive. This will be confusing for many editors who want to display something to indicate that it is a supplement, particularly if there are other numbered supplements in the same Wikipedia article (as those will be automatically display the nth supplement). So I have created a new parameter called display-supp. If it exists then it determines what is displayed (taking a numeric value just like supp), but it does not alter the URL, that is still determined by supp=some value
(see the
testcases for examples). --
PBS (
talk) 11:14, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
and |display-supp=
are set, this template should prefer |supp=
so that there isn't a 'silly display'. Sandbox has changed to reflect this.|supp=<any value>
should be permissible;
|supp=no
and |supp=n
exist in the wild and because 'no
' and 'n
' are members of the any value set, they modify the url accordingly. For this reason, I believe that |supp=
accept only a limited set of values: y
, yes
, 1
–16
. Yes, to do so requires that we troll though transclusions of this template to set everything right.startpage
& endpage
and replace them with the standard parameters page
and pages
. There is really no reason to use startpage
& endpage
when the same information can be extracted from pages parameter using {{
Str number/trim}}
. --
PBS (
talk) 14:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
|supp=1
suggests that there may be |supp=2
... which may or may not be true. |supp=y
does not. In keeping with rendering ordinals, |supp=1
should be expected to render as '1st supplement'. I suspect that most editors neither care, nor know how to find out, if a particular unnumbered supplement stands alone or is the first of some number of supplements.|supp=y
and |supp=yes
,
my original included whatever |supp=
value an editor chose into the supplement annotation: |supp=Blue Meanie
→ (Blue Meanie Supplement)supp=
should be restricted and ought not to be used outside a range because its primary usage is as a binary switch for use in the url, and because the Gazette urls are inconsistently implemented we have situations where there can be a supplement, but the url does not include the word supplement. This is why we need a display-supp
. Now that I have seen more combinations in the wild that include additions to a supplement over and above the numeric value, I propose that we keep the 1-16 for display-supp
(because that is what most of them are), but have a wild card default (to allow for any string) and alter the code back to displaying display-supp
before a value in supp=
. thoughts? --
PBS (
talk) 11:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
and |display-supp=
should interact according to their assigned values:row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | – | – | – | <no supplement display> | /page/ |
most common non-supplement form |
2 | – | y | – | Supplement | /supplement/ |
first or only supplement |
3 | – | 1 | – | Supplement | /supplement/ |
first or only supplement |
4 | – | ## | – | {{{supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
specific numbered supplement |
5 | – | <text> | – | invalid |
/page/ |
invalid or out of range |
5a | none | y | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
6 | ## | – | – | {{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/page/ |
when supplement not at /supplement/ url
|
7 | ## | y | – | {{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
to display '1st supplement' |
8 | ## | ## | {{{supp}}} == {{{display-supp}}} |
{{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
|supp= and |display-supp= must agree |
9 | ## | ## | {{{supp}}} != {{{display-supp}}} |
invalid |
/supplement/ |
ambiguous; which supplement number is correct? |
10 | <text> | – | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/page/ |
user specified text; not at /supplement/ url
|
11 | <text> | y | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/supplement/ |
user specified text |
12 | <text> | ## | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/supplement/ |
user specified text |
13 | <text> | <text> | – | invalid |
/supplement/ |
|supp= invalid or out of range
|
key | ||||||
– | parameter is empty or missing; a condition does not apply | |||||
## | a number greater than zero and less than 100 | |||||
<suffix> | the appropriate ordinal suffix: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ... | |||||
<text> | any characters that are not ## | |||||
== |
logical equality; the statement A == B is true when A and B hold the same value | |||||
!= |
logical inequality; the statement A != B is true when A and B hold different values |
display-supp=text
, supp=
in which case the text should be displayed, this would be desirable for "
3rd Supplement (New Zealand)". --
PBS (
talk) 08:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
|display-supp=3rd supplement (New Zealand)
which the template will then render as : (3rd Supplement (New Zealand)). Table modified.|display-supp=10
with |supp=1
should the template use? It can't know which is the correct value so defaults to the unnumbered rendering. I included row 8 because the only way to get '1st supplement' is to use |display-supp=1
but I can imagine that editors will similarly set |supp=1
even though they do not need to do that. If they do, then the numerical values assigned to |display-supp=
and |supp=
must agree so that we avoid ambiguity.|type=
.|url=
.I thought that we had moved on and that we were keeping supp=y for unnumbered supplements and supp=1 for "1st supplement". At the moment I see that the test follow the table and that of position 3. So I suggest it is changed so "one" behaves as any other number, and update the documentation to reflect that. -- PBS ( talk) 12:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
I have been looking at supplement editions set to yes to start to build a list.
While most of them the display and supplement are the same, meaning the supplement in the url is also correctly displayed using just the supplement, there are anomalies. There are supplements that link as pages (something that has already been mentioned in this section) which are catered for using the display-supp parameter
But I have also come across two that link as supplements but are not supplement issues:
This is not something we have considered in our table. How do others think this is best handled? -- PBS ( talk) 18:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
supp
this can be done by documenting only "y" as an option it and let time do the work.display-supp
that displays "Supplement" without an ordinal (likewise for supp) so then we can distinguish between the traditional use of "Supplement" and the more modern "1st Supplement" when it is part of a series. (see
1916 Birthday Honours and
2016 Birthday Honours)Might it be that /page/-located-in-/supplement/-space is the use-case for |supp=n
? In which case:
row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1a | – | n | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
Using |supp=n
in the sandbox, the two examples render:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |27994 |supp=n |963 |date=1907-02-12}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |28121 |supp=n |2149 |date=1908-03-20}}
I concur with dropping 'yes' in favor of 'y'; I'll adjust the table. If we choose to do that should we also drop '1' in favor of 'y' (row 3 of the table)?
I'm not sure that I see any reason to support |display-supp=y
. Rewriting the example urls using the sandbox:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |29608 |supp=y |5553 |date=1916}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |29609 |supp=2 |5605 |date=1916}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |61608 |display-supp=1 |supp=y |B1 |date=2016}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |61609 |supp=2 |B41 |date=2016}}
Are these not the correct renderings?
Have you seen any cases where a non-supplement page number uses alpha characters (as the supplements above do)?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:13, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
{{{issue|}}}
? Wouldn't it be better to sort by {{{supp|}}}
?
{{#ifeq:{{{supp|}}}|y|<!-- -->|[[Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with parameter supp not set to y|{{{supp|}}}]]}}
{{
Cite Newgenbio}}
.insource:/\| *issue=30637/i
allows us to find all the articles (currently 2) with issue=30637 and add to them display-supp=4, or insource:/\| *issue=30635/i
(8 articles) change the supp parameter from y or yes to supp=2
.supp=n
the proof was how many templates had that already added (until I ran am AWB script to remove them), you will have people using it just because it is not a supp. Instead I think a better way to handle the very few cases is supp=y
and display-supp=none
as this is similar to the way the LUA module handles postscript and ref when they are to be unset.row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5a | none | y | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
|supp=y
and |display-supp=none
in the sandbox, the two examples render:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |27994 |display-supp=none |supp=y |963 |date=1907-02-12}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |28121 |display-supp=none |supp=y |2149 |date=1908-03-20}}
@ Trappist the monk, The great thing about documentation is it doesn't even have to compile. I was expecting display-supp=y to behave the same way as supp=y ie display Supplement (with display-supp=number displaying as 1st 2nd etc) + and additional free text option, above I presented an example of:
I would appreciate it if you implement that. (it just came up with a new addition to the category : Naval artillery and 26359/page/1 a supplement, but accessed via a page so it needs a display-supp=). -- PBS ( talk) 20:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
So now apparently the old supp=yes no longer works, thus rendering many links useless. What on earth was the thinking behind this? Also, links always seem to take us to the first page in an issue and not the actual page specified. Why? It always worked before. Taking something that worked and tinkering with it until it doesn't work properly seems to be a completely retrograde step. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 12:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
|startpage=
and |endpage=
parameters. See the discussions above about the why and wherefore. Similarly, see the above discussion about |supp=yes
.{{London Gazette}}
templates in article space. I notice that you have some pages in your user space that use this template with the now-unsupported parameters. If you would like, I think that I can run the bot on your user space and fix all of those templates.I was fixing reference errors in Category:CS1 errors: dates, and encountered Charles Moore, 2nd Marquess of Drogheda. It uses two Gazette refs:
{{London Gazette|issue=13615|page=64|date=18—21 January 1794}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help){{London Gazette|issue=13213|page=398|date=26—29 June 1790}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)In both cases the date range is correct; changing it to a single date would misrepresent the source. (e.g here's the title page for the first of these examples, 18—21 January 1794: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/13615/page/64)
Help:CS1 errors#bad_date gives some examples of date ranges, but none which over this case.
Is there a workable format? If not, let's disable CS1 date checking on this template. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:33, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
{{London Gazette|issue=11435|page=1|date=26 February–1 March 1774|nolink=y}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help){{
London Gazette}}
is not broken.{{London Gazette|issue=13615|page=64|date=18–21 January 1794}}
{{London Gazette|issue=13213|page=398|date=26–29 June 1790}}
{{London Gazette|issue=11435|page=1|date=26 February – 1 March 1774|nolink=y}}
I have occasionally come across cases where military dispatches are published in a Gazette with a know author. I suppose the most famous is Wellington's Waterloo dispatch:
Occasional there are other articles with a named author:
So I think it is desirable to add the followin parameters to this template:
Any thoughts? -- PBS ( talk) 09:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
|display-authors=etal
?What exactly is the point of this maintenance category Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with parameter supp set to y? As far as I know, supp=y is still a perfectly valid option for this template. The category was created in May, but there are still no instructions as to what is supposed to happen to the pages in this maintenance category. Is there supposed to be some migration to supp=something else? —Мандичка YO 😜 11:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
This category is sorted by issue.
To date one of the the largest set of supplements (in one issue) that I have found that of 1919-05-30, three of the supplements are false negatives so the parameter "display-supp=" is used.
listed as example templates
|
---|
|
So the category helps with numbering supplementary issues and once numbered they are removed from this category. Without this category doing this analysis would be much more difficult. Once found then a regular expression search can be done and all the instances of the templates in articles can be fixed. This can either be done manually, with AWB or a bot. -- PBS ( talk) 11:58, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
A another example of why the category is useful, I just looked at the first two entries ( Wilf Hughes and George Macdonald (historian). Both point to the wrong Gazette issue. -- PBS ( talk) 12:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:London Gazette has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It appears
Zackmann08's recent edit inadvertently added an extra }}
to the end of the template. Would this be able to be removed? Thanks,
142.160.89.97 (
talk) 06:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. I have recreated the old module as a redirect. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- DannyS712 ( talk) 01:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC) DannyS712 ( talk) 01:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
– For the same reason that Template:London Gazette isn't called Template:Gazette. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:48, 9 June 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. DannyS712 ( talk) 20:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
{{#invoke:Gazette util|...}}
to the newly chosen name in {{
London Gazette}}
(5×). As to whether the module should be moved: meh, I'm indifferent.insource:"{{#invoke:Gazette util"
as that will catch all of the invocations using the module name directly. To be more certain, you can also search in Module namespace for insource:"Gazette util"
in case it's loaded by another module. Hope that helps. --
RexxS (
talk) 21:50, 4 July 2019 (UTC)Is this a solution without a problem? I suppose it is London Gazette specific rather than a generic citation module for use with other Government Gazettes. Woody ( talk) 17:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Is there any chance a link=no field could be added so that second and subsequent uses of the template in a Reference section don't link to the London Gazette? Thanks, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
|nolink=y
. Does this not work for you?Dear Wikipedians. I feel that the instructions for the use of the date parameter are not clear enough. It says the "publication date of the Gazette". Several dates appear on the London Gazette. It shows a date on the first page of each issue above the texts (the plublication date of the issue) and then in most cases dates appearing on top of various pieces of text. For example, the citation of the London Gazette in the article John Nevill, 5th Marquess of Abergavenny uses the date on top of the first page, i.e. Thursday 4th, April 1974, as the argument of the date parameter. In this example the date on top of the piece of text reporting the appointment the Marquess differs from this date and reads 1st April 1974. There is also considerable variation of these uses of dates through the long history of the London Gazette, which probably need also to be taken into account. E.g. many older issues give a date range at the head of the issue instead of a single date. However, if the the argument of the date parameter is the date of the issue, why bother with it at all as the issue is uniquely identified by its number? Sometimes the publication date is less important than the date when the reported event happened and it might be useful to give an opportunity for that date to be recorded on the template. With many thanks. Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
many older issues give a date range at the head of the issue instead of a single date?
{{
citation}}
instead of {{
London Gazette}}
just as it is ok for you to use {{London Gazette}}
when all other citations are {{citation}}
.{{London Gazette}}
works well with {{
sfn}}
. There are two options:
{{sfn|''London Gazette''|1691}}
[1] – year of issue; can be disambiguated with lowercase alpha (1691a, 1691b) to link to different Gazette issues from the same year{{sfn|Gazette|2687}}
[2] – discouraged; uses default {{
London Gazette}}
CITEREF
anchor but when issue number exceeds 4 digits {{sfn}}
rendering fails; also, this form can't be styled to properly render italicized London GazetteReferences
{{London Gazette|title=Rye, August 8|issue=2687|date=10–13 August 1691|ref={{sfnref|''London Gazette''|1691}}|mode=cs2}}
{{London Gazette|title=Rye, August 8|issue=2687|date=10–13 August 1691|mode=cs2}}
|mode=cs2
matches {{London Gazette}}
rendering style to that of {{
citation}}
.economy of space. I have always believed and said, I don't know how many times, that if quotations from sources are a necessary part of the article, those quotations should be included in the article text or in a separate footnotes section and cited accordingly. This keeps the references sections clean and concise. It is intended that short cites be just that: short.
{{sfn|''London Gazette''|1711a|loc=[https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/4948/page/1 Issue 4948, page 1]|ps=: "Whitehall, January 4. Her Majesty hath been graciously pleas'd to Constitute his Grace the Duke of Ormonde Commander of all Her Majesty's Land Forces in that part of the Kingdom of Great Britain call'd England, and Colonel of Her Majesty's First Regiment of Foot Guards. "}}
|date=
in the matching Gazette template should also include the disambiguator because printed copies of the article cannot link from short-form cite to long-form cite.the full [descriptions] appear in the list of references, perhaps a subsection of § Notes and references: §§Sources with §§§Books and §§§London Gazette (these last two could be pseudo-headings:
'''Books'''
, etc) where §Books is sorted by author-date and §London Gazette is sorted chronologically.economy of space. One way to economize on the space occupied by an article's citations is to minimize the amount of text that citations emit.
This template's documentation directs me to Wikipedia:London Gazette Index to convert dates into issue numbers, but the URLs for (at least old) issues of the Gazette are stale, because the schema has changed. See Wikipedia talk:London Gazette Index#Stale URLs. Hairy Dude ( talk) 04:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Trappist the monk said above that the default CITEREF is discouraged for technical reasons. This would seem to be at least partially solved by changing the second CITEREF parameter from issue to date, as shown in the sandbox [5]. DrKay ( talk) 14:34, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
|issue=
and sandbox using |date=
; note the ampersands in the short-form references:
CITEREFGazette33000
CITEREFGazette9_December_1924
{{
harvnb}}
or {{
sfn}}
wrapper template that accepts a single parameter (issue number) and from that creates a call to {{harvnb}}
or {{sfn}}
:
{{gazette_harvnb|33000}}
creates →
{{harvnb|Gazette No. 33000|ref=CITEREFGazette33000}}
which renders as →
There are cases where the page number is not a number and this template does not seem to produce the link correctly.
{{London Gazette|issue=6610|page=3.a.a|date=26 September 1727}}
Any chance this can be fixed? I assume allowing non-numeric page number means some ability of error detection will be removed. ネイ ( talk) 10:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I have modified Module:London Gazette util to notice when issues 1610–1619 are being linked so that the url for these issues can be either simple digits or digit+dot+alpha. At present, the alpha character is constrained to 'a' only. Are there other cases where this sort of oddball page numbering occurs?
{{London Gazette|issue=6610|page=3.a.a|date=26 September 1727}}
→
"No. 6610".
The London Gazette. 26 September 1727. p. 3.a.a.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Why does this use {{
cite magazine}}
and not {{
cite news}}
? It's always been a newspaper, it's never had pictures, colour, or glossy paper. Just the facts, in plain ordinary black text on flat white paper. The supplements are no different. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 00:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette}}
template that uses |title=
:
{{London Gazette |issue=34000 |date=1 December 1933 |pages=7765–7766 |title=Tenders for Treasury Bills}}
{{
London Gazette}}
and change -->|{{cite magazine
to -->|{{cite news
and then preview this page with that you will see that the issue is rendered as:
{{
cite magazine}}
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 1 | Archive 2 |
Could the template be expanded to produce something more akin to {{ cite web}} or {{ cite news}} i.e. including access date, link to the London Gazette and HMSO articles? I've added Gazette references to a number of pages (e.g. Peterborough, New towns in the United Kingdom and various honour/decoration related articles) either use straight external links, or the cite templates. This could be a good alternative, but in it's present form wouldn't be compatible with the cite series which I tend to use for other references within an article.
I think there may have been a slight change to the format of url that the Gazette website is using for supplements, now seem to have just "&type=Supplement" not "&type=ArchivedSupplement". There may be other changes too. David Underdown 13:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to move the Gazette date out of the hyperlink to the the Gazette issue. This would allow the date to have wikilinks placed around it to enable user preferences for dates (may even be possible to handle this automatically, I'm not sure). David Underdown 11:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Using Special:linksearch it appears that there are over 150 articles linking to the London Gazette in the old format url (all now broken of course), see http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Linksearch&target=www.gazette-online.co.uk&namespace=&limit=250&offset=0 Some others are using the new format, but not the template, and others just link to the Gazette Online homepage and probably could be fixed to point to a specific issue. I'll try and work through some of these from time to time, but it will take a while. David Underdown 13:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I've just been updating the London Gazette links on John Capper to use the template (since the existing ones were the old style urls), and the third use of the template doesn't seem to be rendering correctly for no reason that I can work out - the url and the link title are both visible on the page, along with the square brackets. Any ideas? David Underdown 12:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I think it would be useful if one could quote from the gazette in the reference. Could we have an optional parameter as per {{ Cite web}} which allows for
{{#if: {{{quote|}}} | “{{{quote}}}” }}
Any objections? -- Matilda talk 22:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible to use ref name with the template? I'm getting "Cite error: Invalid ref tag; name cannot be a simple integer. Use a descriptive title" when I try to. Any suggestions? Craigy ( talk) 09:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
For those who have searched the LG for the past few years and found that 1985 hasn't been searchable since (like I have), I have just received a reply from someone at the LG who has said that 1985 has recently been transcribed and should be available by December 2008 at the latest. Craigy ( talk) 11:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
An issue arising from the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Neil Hamilton Fairley/archive1:
My understanding is that it does not appear because what you actually get is a page of which a frame is a PDF. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
As an experiment, I started to proofread issue 19345 and 19346 (both from January 1836) on Wikisource. If this effort turns out to make any sense, we could have many years of work ahead. Is there any favorite issue or date to try next? -- LA2 ( talk) 05:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
If both the linkeddate
and date
parameters are missing, the template displays both a comma and a period as the closing punctuation. This is easy enough to fix, but should it just be shortened to a period, or should I add a check to the error box for the date parameters? Based on the template documentation, I'm thinking adding it to the error box is probably the way to go. –
RobinHood70
talk 18:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
date/linkeddate
as a required parameter to this template. Please note that this will produce errors where none showed before, however I believe the template documentation makes it fairly clear that date
should always be included. If this behaviour is significantly disruptive, it can be removed if there's a pressing demand, but the better option is probably to fix those articles where the errors occur so that dates are included. –
RobinHood70
talk 21:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Can someone with the know-how please introduce a parameter to allow users to delink London Gazette when they use this template? I understand some users like to have wikilinks in their references, but it really shouldn't be repeated after the first use. Apterygial talk 11:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
nolink=1
and it will not be linked. –
RobinHood70
talk 21:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)I created an index to the London Gazette, some time ago (which allows you to find the issue number from the date). I linked to it from the /doc page, but thought I might mention it here too.
Wikipedia:London Gazette Index.
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC).
There is a type of London Gazette entry called a "notice", for example http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/55222/notices/4SI - would it be worth adding capability for these? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 21:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
In all of Wikipedia there is a consistent style that holds true for all links. Except, apparently, for the links produced by this template.
These two cites give roughly the same information. The first is produced by {{
London Gazette}}
and the second by a misused {{
cite news}}
template. The order of output is a bit different but the important part is what is missing from the {{London Gazette}}
template output. What is missing is external link icon. Because every external link in WP has that icon, I was surprised at the unexpected output of the {{London Gazette}}
template.
Thought you should know in case you'd like to fix it.
-- Trappist the monk ( talk) 03:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
{{
LondonGazette}}
offers.<frame name="pdf" onload="trackView();" src="/issues/29169/pages/4894/page.pdf" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="1" />
/issues/29169/pages/4894/page.pdf
( ←) Just so it's clear, the "change" wasn't something I actively did, it was more of a passive choice. By removing the "plainlinks" class, that left only the older "PDFlink" class, which is what's showing the PDF icon. It'll take all of about two seconds to remove that as well if desired, but I really have no opinion on whether the link is appropriate for a PDF in a frame or not. I'll be watching this page, though, so if the decision is to remove it, once I notice, I'll make the change if another template-savvy person doesn't beat me to it. Edit: Oops, looks like David already said something similar above—I missed it at first. – RobinHood70 talk 02:50, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible to display supplement numbers where supplied? At present, filling in the supp field just displays supplement - this is fine where there is only one supplement (in which case the LG usually doesn't number it), but in numbers of cases there are multiple supplements which are numbered. Proper text citation should include this detail. My suggestion would be to modify the template so that if a number X is included in this field, it generates (Supplement X), with the behaviour remaining otherwise unchanged from the status quo.
Additionally, would it be possible to add a flag that allows the citation to display in an abbreviated format, eg: LG 31086(S3):15151–15162icon. 27 Dec 1918. Access 23 Jun 2012. Dates formatting would still be derived from what was input by the editor. Allowing a condensed format will be useful for a resource index that I am starting to compile (in a sortable table) for Mil History and Orders/Decorations/Medals editors and will allow editors flexibility in citation style in other appropriate contexts. The suggested format includes moving the supplement number to after the issue number - this prevents sorting issues when using in a sortable table. AusTerrapin ( talk) 18:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
|supp=
parameter doesn't just alter the display, it also alters the URL. Taking the example of the previous section, compare these:
{{
London Gazette|issue=29169|startpage=4894|date=21 May 1915|accessdate=16 November 2009}}
→
"No. 29169".
The London Gazette. 21 May 1915.{{
London Gazette|issue=29169|startpage=4894|date=21 May 1915|accessdate=16 November 2009|supp=yes}}
→
"No. 29169".
The London Gazette (invalid |supp=
(
help)). 21 May 1915.|supp=
parameter formats the URL. Do different supplements have different forms of URL?|supp=
is treated the same as |supp=yes
, even |supp=no
. I think that we should get all this cleaned up before we look at altering the effect of |supp=
. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
/pages/
is replaced with /supplements/
. The rest of the url is otherwise the same for both, although the page numbering in supplements starts at 1 each time and does not run in sequence with the normal gazettes which continue from edition to edition and only restart at the beginning of a year. If a supplement number is required to be shown, this would be simplest to implement using an additional parameter (say |suppnum
).--
DavidCane (
talk) 20:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
|supp=
is blank or absent, it's not a supplement; if it's filled in with anything, even |supp=no
, it is assumed to be a supplement.|notarchive=
parameter puts the page into
Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters. I fixed up a lot of |supp=n
last year (
example), but by no means all. Only when all uses of |supp=
are "clean" can we start using the parameter for a variant purpose. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 13:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)I've added a "ps" parameter to allow suppression of the trailing period, for compatibility with the {{ citation}} template. It would be good if someone with more knowledge and experience of the WikiMedia parser extensions than I have checks over what I've done though. Malleus Fatuorum 01:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
{{#if: {{{ps|}}} | {{{ps}}} | . }}
? Or if you don't want the period, use {{#if: {{{ps|}}} | {{{ps}}} }}
.
Debresser (
talk) 06:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please edit the template to ensure that the output of the gazettes' names is rendered in line with the wiki/official names, that is to say, with the "The" as part of the title viz: 'The London Gazette', 'The Edinburgh Gazette', 'The Belfast Gazette'. Thank you. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 04:46, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
|nolink=
is set to yes and therefore the link to
The London Gazette isn't made then the display in the citation is just London Gazette still. As long as the display name is the same regardless of the setting of |nolink=
then I have no objection.
NtheP (
talk) 17:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The London Gazette has recently launched a new beta website, using the new url http://www.thegazette.co.uk/ - this will also incorporate the Belfast and Edinburgh publications. The end of the url will remain the same (ie issue/nnnnnnn/[pages/supplements]/mmmm) but the London Gazette urls will begin http://www.thegazette.co.uk/london (and so on for Belfast and Edinburgh - I haven't checked the earliest editions to see if Oxford is used). The existing urls will work for now but will eventually be replaced by ones in this form. David Underdown ( talk) 16:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
This template is utterly user-unfriendly. As a fairly experienced editor, I have no idea
how to fix this, and hope someone can or will.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk) 14:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Should we move to Template:The Gazette (UK) following the website rebrand? D B D 16:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
The template has now completely stopped working, presumably because of the tinkering with the Gazette's website. I don't have the technical expertise to fix this. Anyone who does, please feel free. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/33000/pages/8957
. Presumably, Edinburgh and Belfast gazettes are similarly structured.The Gazette appears to have changed their website and the way in which issues appear, [3], so this template will need to change to adjust to it.-- Tærkast ( Discuss) 10:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi. What is the link between the parameters called "Notice ID" and "Notice code" on the Gazette website, and the ones specified in the WP template (|issue=
and the like)? Specifically, if I want to link to
[4] using {{
London Gazette}}, what should I enter in the template fields? Thanks!
It Is Me Here
t /
c 19:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The template currently provides a link to one page only of a LG issue (the endpage value only affects the link text). To see further pages, one has to click forward or back and wait for the site to respond. But the site permits a URL such as
http://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/55710, without a page number. This produces a PDF of all pages of the issue, so that one can scroll up and down without having to wait for the site. Would it be useful to make this feature available via the template, if only for use in the many honours list pages (
Template:Honours Lists)?
Stanning (
talk) 14:10, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette/sandbox}}
to do this, but have not tested it yet. {{
London Gazette/test cases}}
will need cases with various combinations of startpage and endpage, supplement specified (correctly and incorrectly) and not specified (correctly and incorrectly). Note that this makes "startpage" no longer mandatory. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 15:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC).Would just like to know which date should be used if linked to a supplement of an issue: the date the supplement was published or the date when the issue itself was published? Thanks. -- Re5x ( talk) 17:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
I suppose I could just start using cite news or cite web instead, but the lack of a quote parameter for this template was driving me crazy. I have been playing around in the sandbox, and I think that I've managed to get it working. Would anyone care to have a look? -- tronvillain ( talk) 15:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
There is a problem in the template language with nested constructs like {{#if:{{{startpage|{{{page|{{{pages|{{{2|
which used to bite people when coding the old {{
cite book}}
templates before
LUA was implemented. If someone writes a wapper around a template in this case lets call it {{
son of LG}}
the code will typically have within it:
{{son of LG |startpage={{{startpage|}}} .... }}
This means that as above the if statement will fail because startpage
exists but is empty and so page
is never tested. Here is an example to show it.
It is to avoid this possible scripting problem with an if statement that usually works for direct calls to a template, but usually fails when called from a wrapper template that I usually write in wrapper templates a construct like this:
|{{#if:{{{startpage|}}} |startpage |HIDE_PARAMETER}}={{{startpage|}}}
and why I want LUA module for citations to support a null parameter/sink (similar to a null device on a Unix system), as it would allow the dummy HIDE_PARAMETER to be replaced with null). -- PBS ( talk) 12:19, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Before the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 took effect in 1752, the year in Great Britain officially started on Lady Day, 25 March. This is reflected in the Gazette dates, so issue no. 9042, 19–23 March 1750, is followed by issue no. 9043, 23–26 March 1751. The convention when giving dates between 1 January and 24 March for years before 1752 is to note that they are Old Style, or to give the year as 1750/1. Since the recent changes the template now doesn't like this, and gives a red error message to Check date values e.g. here. In that list of references is a Gazette with a date range spanning more than one month, which the template doesn't seem to like either. Opera hat ( talk) 18:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
{{London Gazette|nolink=y|issue=9359|startpage=2|date=30 March – 2 April 1754}}
{{{London Gazette |issue=6253|page=1 |date=4 January 1723/1724}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)|date=
without error. Here, dates quoted from each of your examples and rewritten using the template:
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)writing about historical events. With this template, we are not
writing about historical events; we are citing a document which itself writes its own issue dates in single-year form. At the Gazette's website, we can view facsimiles of these documents; the website uses a single-year issue-date. Were I searching through the paper originals, I would not be looking for double-year form issue dates because that form of issue date does not occur in the sources.
writing about [an] historical [event]so it would be proper to use OSNS date forms in our writing. But that is not the purpose or function of this template. Dates in this template should reflect as closely as possible, within the constraints of cs1|2, the issue date that we get from the issue.
This template collects pages that use deprecated parameters in
Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with deprecated parameters. Currently only |ps=
is declared as deprecated. I would suggest that there are a few other parameters that should also be deprecated:
|separator=
– in cs1|2 the functionality of this parameter is handled by |mode=
which is supported by this template|startpage=
and |endpage=
– the sandbox version of the template has support for the standard cs1|2 parameters |page=
and |pages=
making |startpage=
and |endpage=
superfluous|accessdate=
and |access-date=
– this template links to archived facsimiles of Gazette pages. Those pages will not change; the wrapping html page may change, but the facsimile will not. |accessdate=
and |access-date=
are intended to mark a point in time when the content of an ephemeral web page supported text in a Wikipedia article. The archived Gazette facsimile is not ephemeral even though the wrapping html page may be. If an editor at Wikipedia is citing the content of the wrapping html page, then this template is not the correct template and the editor would be better served by using {{
cite web}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 14:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
|access-date=
and |accessdate=
.Any reason to not update the live template from the sandbox?
I've got an AWB script that will fix the deprecated parameters which can go to WP:BRFA after the template and its documentation are updated.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 10:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
{{
Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae}}
where I removed the use of startpage and endpage (replacing them with page or pages), and then altered the script so only page or pages can be used. The regular expression logic was quite easy: Look for every instance where there was startpage ... endpage pair, or endpaage ... startpage pair, and replace with pages, replace the remaining startpage with page. --
PBS (
talk)|supp=
error messages. These are easily discovered with an appropriate search string like "(invalid |supp= (help)".|startpage = {{{page|}}}
to |page={{{page|}}}
.I have rewritten the template as a wrapper around {{
cite news}}
.
I have made sure that all the current parameters are supported and that the tests for issue and date are maintained.
Changes:
{{
cite news}}
— I see this as an advantage as it will be similar to other in-line cations within an article.separator
parameter used to support any character will now only support comma and dot. This is inline with the current standard templates that no longer supports "separator" but set the separator character by the mode parameter (see below)ps
is still supported but so is standard named "postscript
parameter. However the default depends on the mode setting and is not set in the template.unnamed parameter 1
if fixed. Prior to the changes the value was not trimmed of any trailing spaces. This used to break the url by putting terminating spaces in it. This caused the url to link to the start of the issue and display the remainder of the url as part of the identifier on the page.I have added some new parameters:
{{sfn|Gazette|18903|p=259}}
or something similar.
Higher up this page there is a section #Unfriendly template where there is a complain that the code. I think that my changes simplify it, or at least it moves the complicated code into discrete sections. There is also several requests for a quotation parameter the last being in the section #Quote personally I do not think it is needed (as I always put the quote first and then add the citation), but it is now trivial to add the parameter to the code (if someone wants to do it):
|quote={{{quote|}}}
-- PBS ( talk) 20:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if {{
cite magazine}}
would be a better choice because of how that template handles |issue=
. Also, I think that the parenthetical supplement annotation prefixed to issue is in the wrong place and it looks bad. When the issue number is used in lieu of a title I think that the 'no.' prefix should be 'No.' I've changed the sandbox to use {{cite magazine}}
and to place the supplement annotation in |type=
.
These use |supp=
:
|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919.|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919. – sandboxand these don't:
It also seems to me that the value assigned to |supp=
should be changed so that it is meaningful. Instead of being used as a boolean operator, where any text simply forces the template to add the supplement annotation, we might change the template so that when |supp=
has a value other than 'y
', that value modifies the supplement annotation:
|supp=y
→
The London Gazette (Supplement).|supp=Fourth
→
The London Gazette (Fourth Supplement).— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=<whatever content>
to |supp=y
before implementation. Were the awb task clever, |supp=1
would be changed to |supp=First
.|supp=
will alter the URL from .../page/...
to .../supplement/...
, and I know of no other valid URL formats. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 14:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
(
help)). No. 31712. 30 December 1919.|supp=<anything>
modifies the target url (and adds the supplement annotation as I have already described). This is why I suggested that it would be necessary to do an awb run through these templates to change |supp=<anything>
to |supp=y
so that we can then use the sandbox change to modify how the supplement annotation renders.{{
cite newspaper}}
, not because I think it is the best choice, but because the Gazette is a newspaper and using a standard citation template was better that what came previously. So if you want to change it to another standard citation template I have no objection.|supp=1
because 1
equates to yes, true. There are some 8k |supp=yes
so I've tweaked the sandbox to allow that usage along with |supp=y
.{{
cite magazine}}
, than it does under current {{
cite news}}
, so I am in favour of making the change, even if it is decided not to go with numbered supp=.There was a problem with the new code. As I mentioned above there is an inconsistency in the Gazette database. Sometimes the creators of that page hierarchy do not include supplement in the url to a supplement eg. "Supplement to The London Gazette of Tuesday 11 of July" does not use
supplement in the link to the Gazette archive. This will be confusing for many editors who want to display something to indicate that it is a supplement, particularly if there are other numbered supplements in the same Wikipedia article (as those will be automatically display the nth supplement). So I have created a new parameter called display-supp. If it exists then it determines what is displayed (taking a numeric value just like supp), but it does not alter the URL, that is still determined by supp=some value
(see the
testcases for examples). --
PBS (
talk) 11:14, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
and |display-supp=
are set, this template should prefer |supp=
so that there isn't a 'silly display'. Sandbox has changed to reflect this.|supp=<any value>
should be permissible;
|supp=no
and |supp=n
exist in the wild and because 'no
' and 'n
' are members of the any value set, they modify the url accordingly. For this reason, I believe that |supp=
accept only a limited set of values: y
, yes
, 1
–16
. Yes, to do so requires that we troll though transclusions of this template to set everything right.startpage
& endpage
and replace them with the standard parameters page
and pages
. There is really no reason to use startpage
& endpage
when the same information can be extracted from pages parameter using {{
Str number/trim}}
. --
PBS (
talk) 14:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
|supp=1
suggests that there may be |supp=2
... which may or may not be true. |supp=y
does not. In keeping with rendering ordinals, |supp=1
should be expected to render as '1st supplement'. I suspect that most editors neither care, nor know how to find out, if a particular unnumbered supplement stands alone or is the first of some number of supplements.|supp=y
and |supp=yes
,
my original included whatever |supp=
value an editor chose into the supplement annotation: |supp=Blue Meanie
→ (Blue Meanie Supplement)supp=
should be restricted and ought not to be used outside a range because its primary usage is as a binary switch for use in the url, and because the Gazette urls are inconsistently implemented we have situations where there can be a supplement, but the url does not include the word supplement. This is why we need a display-supp
. Now that I have seen more combinations in the wild that include additions to a supplement over and above the numeric value, I propose that we keep the 1-16 for display-supp
(because that is what most of them are), but have a wild card default (to allow for any string) and alter the code back to displaying display-supp
before a value in supp=
. thoughts? --
PBS (
talk) 11:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
|supp=
and |display-supp=
should interact according to their assigned values:row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | – | – | – | <no supplement display> | /page/ |
most common non-supplement form |
2 | – | y | – | Supplement | /supplement/ |
first or only supplement |
3 | – | 1 | – | Supplement | /supplement/ |
first or only supplement |
4 | – | ## | – | {{{supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
specific numbered supplement |
5 | – | <text> | – | invalid |
/page/ |
invalid or out of range |
5a | none | y | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
6 | ## | – | – | {{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/page/ |
when supplement not at /supplement/ url
|
7 | ## | y | – | {{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
to display '1st supplement' |
8 | ## | ## | {{{supp}}} == {{{display-supp}}} |
{{{display-supp}}} <suffix> supplement |
/supplement/ |
|supp= and |display-supp= must agree |
9 | ## | ## | {{{supp}}} != {{{display-supp}}} |
invalid |
/supplement/ |
ambiguous; which supplement number is correct? |
10 | <text> | – | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/page/ |
user specified text; not at /supplement/ url
|
11 | <text> | y | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/supplement/ |
user specified text |
12 | <text> | ## | – | {{{display-supp}}} |
/supplement/ |
user specified text |
13 | <text> | <text> | – | invalid |
/supplement/ |
|supp= invalid or out of range
|
key | ||||||
– | parameter is empty or missing; a condition does not apply | |||||
## | a number greater than zero and less than 100 | |||||
<suffix> | the appropriate ordinal suffix: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ... | |||||
<text> | any characters that are not ## | |||||
== |
logical equality; the statement A == B is true when A and B hold the same value | |||||
!= |
logical inequality; the statement A != B is true when A and B hold different values |
display-supp=text
, supp=
in which case the text should be displayed, this would be desirable for "
3rd Supplement (New Zealand)". --
PBS (
talk) 08:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
|display-supp=3rd supplement (New Zealand)
which the template will then render as : (3rd Supplement (New Zealand)). Table modified.|display-supp=10
with |supp=1
should the template use? It can't know which is the correct value so defaults to the unnumbered rendering. I included row 8 because the only way to get '1st supplement' is to use |display-supp=1
but I can imagine that editors will similarly set |supp=1
even though they do not need to do that. If they do, then the numerical values assigned to |display-supp=
and |supp=
must agree so that we avoid ambiguity.|type=
.|url=
.I thought that we had moved on and that we were keeping supp=y for unnumbered supplements and supp=1 for "1st supplement". At the moment I see that the test follow the table and that of position 3. So I suggest it is changed so "one" behaves as any other number, and update the documentation to reflect that. -- PBS ( talk) 12:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
I have been looking at supplement editions set to yes to start to build a list.
While most of them the display and supplement are the same, meaning the supplement in the url is also correctly displayed using just the supplement, there are anomalies. There are supplements that link as pages (something that has already been mentioned in this section) which are catered for using the display-supp parameter
But I have also come across two that link as supplements but are not supplement issues:
This is not something we have considered in our table. How do others think this is best handled? -- PBS ( talk) 18:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
supp
this can be done by documenting only "y" as an option it and let time do the work.display-supp
that displays "Supplement" without an ordinal (likewise for supp) so then we can distinguish between the traditional use of "Supplement" and the more modern "1st Supplement" when it is part of a series. (see
1916 Birthday Honours and
2016 Birthday Honours)Might it be that /page/-located-in-/supplement/-space is the use-case for |supp=n
? In which case:
row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1a | – | n | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
Using |supp=n
in the sandbox, the two examples render:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |27994 |supp=n |963 |date=1907-02-12}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |28121 |supp=n |2149 |date=1908-03-20}}
I concur with dropping 'yes' in favor of 'y'; I'll adjust the table. If we choose to do that should we also drop '1' in favor of 'y' (row 3 of the table)?
I'm not sure that I see any reason to support |display-supp=y
. Rewriting the example urls using the sandbox:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |29608 |supp=y |5553 |date=1916}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |29609 |supp=2 |5605 |date=1916}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |61608 |display-supp=1 |supp=y |B1 |date=2016}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |61609 |supp=2 |B41 |date=2016}}
Are these not the correct renderings?
Have you seen any cases where a non-supplement page number uses alpha characters (as the supplements above do)?
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 11:13, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
{{{issue|}}}
? Wouldn't it be better to sort by {{{supp|}}}
?
{{#ifeq:{{{supp|}}}|y|<!-- -->|[[Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with parameter supp not set to y|{{{supp|}}}]]}}
{{
Cite Newgenbio}}
.insource:/\| *issue=30637/i
allows us to find all the articles (currently 2) with issue=30637 and add to them display-supp=4, or insource:/\| *issue=30635/i
(8 articles) change the supp parameter from y or yes to supp=2
.supp=n
the proof was how many templates had that already added (until I ran am AWB script to remove them), you will have people using it just because it is not a supp. Instead I think a better way to handle the very few cases is supp=y
and display-supp=none
as this is similar to the way the LUA module handles postscript and ref when they are to be unset.row | |display-supp= | |supp= | condition | displayed result | url | comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5a | none | y | – | <no supplement display> | /supplement/ |
when page not at /page/ url
|
|supp=y
and |display-supp=none
in the sandbox, the two examples render:
{{London Gazette/sandbox |27994 |display-supp=none |supp=y |963 |date=1907-02-12}}
{{London Gazette/sandbox |28121 |display-supp=none |supp=y |2149 |date=1908-03-20}}
@ Trappist the monk, The great thing about documentation is it doesn't even have to compile. I was expecting display-supp=y to behave the same way as supp=y ie display Supplement (with display-supp=number displaying as 1st 2nd etc) + and additional free text option, above I presented an example of:
I would appreciate it if you implement that. (it just came up with a new addition to the category : Naval artillery and 26359/page/1 a supplement, but accessed via a page so it needs a display-supp=). -- PBS ( talk) 20:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
So now apparently the old supp=yes no longer works, thus rendering many links useless. What on earth was the thinking behind this? Also, links always seem to take us to the first page in an issue and not the actual page specified. Why? It always worked before. Taking something that worked and tinkering with it until it doesn't work properly seems to be a completely retrograde step. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 12:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
|startpage=
and |endpage=
parameters. See the discussions above about the why and wherefore. Similarly, see the above discussion about |supp=yes
.{{London Gazette}}
templates in article space. I notice that you have some pages in your user space that use this template with the now-unsupported parameters. If you would like, I think that I can run the bot on your user space and fix all of those templates.I was fixing reference errors in Category:CS1 errors: dates, and encountered Charles Moore, 2nd Marquess of Drogheda. It uses two Gazette refs:
{{London Gazette|issue=13615|page=64|date=18—21 January 1794}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help){{London Gazette|issue=13213|page=398|date=26—29 June 1790}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)In both cases the date range is correct; changing it to a single date would misrepresent the source. (e.g here's the title page for the first of these examples, 18—21 January 1794: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/13615/page/64)
Help:CS1 errors#bad_date gives some examples of date ranges, but none which over this case.
Is there a workable format? If not, let's disable CS1 date checking on this template. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:33, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
{{London Gazette|issue=11435|page=1|date=26 February–1 March 1774|nolink=y}}
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help){{
London Gazette}}
is not broken.{{London Gazette|issue=13615|page=64|date=18–21 January 1794}}
{{London Gazette|issue=13213|page=398|date=26–29 June 1790}}
{{London Gazette|issue=11435|page=1|date=26 February – 1 March 1774|nolink=y}}
I have occasionally come across cases where military dispatches are published in a Gazette with a know author. I suppose the most famous is Wellington's Waterloo dispatch:
Occasional there are other articles with a named author:
So I think it is desirable to add the followin parameters to this template:
Any thoughts? -- PBS ( talk) 09:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
|display-authors=etal
?What exactly is the point of this maintenance category Category:Pages containing London Gazette template with parameter supp set to y? As far as I know, supp=y is still a perfectly valid option for this template. The category was created in May, but there are still no instructions as to what is supposed to happen to the pages in this maintenance category. Is there supposed to be some migration to supp=something else? —Мандичка YO 😜 11:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
This category is sorted by issue.
To date one of the the largest set of supplements (in one issue) that I have found that of 1919-05-30, three of the supplements are false negatives so the parameter "display-supp=" is used.
listed as example templates
|
---|
|
So the category helps with numbering supplementary issues and once numbered they are removed from this category. Without this category doing this analysis would be much more difficult. Once found then a regular expression search can be done and all the instances of the templates in articles can be fixed. This can either be done manually, with AWB or a bot. -- PBS ( talk) 11:58, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
A another example of why the category is useful, I just looked at the first two entries ( Wilf Hughes and George Macdonald (historian). Both point to the wrong Gazette issue. -- PBS ( talk) 12:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:London Gazette has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It appears
Zackmann08's recent edit inadvertently added an extra }}
to the end of the template. Would this be able to be removed? Thanks,
142.160.89.97 (
talk) 06:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. I have recreated the old module as a redirect. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- DannyS712 ( talk) 01:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC) DannyS712 ( talk) 01:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
– For the same reason that Template:London Gazette isn't called Template:Gazette. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:48, 9 June 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. DannyS712 ( talk) 20:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
{{#invoke:Gazette util|...}}
to the newly chosen name in {{
London Gazette}}
(5×). As to whether the module should be moved: meh, I'm indifferent.insource:"{{#invoke:Gazette util"
as that will catch all of the invocations using the module name directly. To be more certain, you can also search in Module namespace for insource:"Gazette util"
in case it's loaded by another module. Hope that helps. --
RexxS (
talk) 21:50, 4 July 2019 (UTC)Is this a solution without a problem? I suppose it is London Gazette specific rather than a generic citation module for use with other Government Gazettes. Woody ( talk) 17:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Is there any chance a link=no field could be added so that second and subsequent uses of the template in a Reference section don't link to the London Gazette? Thanks, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
|nolink=y
. Does this not work for you?Dear Wikipedians. I feel that the instructions for the use of the date parameter are not clear enough. It says the "publication date of the Gazette". Several dates appear on the London Gazette. It shows a date on the first page of each issue above the texts (the plublication date of the issue) and then in most cases dates appearing on top of various pieces of text. For example, the citation of the London Gazette in the article John Nevill, 5th Marquess of Abergavenny uses the date on top of the first page, i.e. Thursday 4th, April 1974, as the argument of the date parameter. In this example the date on top of the piece of text reporting the appointment the Marquess differs from this date and reads 1st April 1974. There is also considerable variation of these uses of dates through the long history of the London Gazette, which probably need also to be taken into account. E.g. many older issues give a date range at the head of the issue instead of a single date. However, if the the argument of the date parameter is the date of the issue, why bother with it at all as the issue is uniquely identified by its number? Sometimes the publication date is less important than the date when the reported event happened and it might be useful to give an opportunity for that date to be recorded on the template. With many thanks. Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
many older issues give a date range at the head of the issue instead of a single date?
{{
citation}}
instead of {{
London Gazette}}
just as it is ok for you to use {{London Gazette}}
when all other citations are {{citation}}
.{{London Gazette}}
works well with {{
sfn}}
. There are two options:
{{sfn|''London Gazette''|1691}}
[1] – year of issue; can be disambiguated with lowercase alpha (1691a, 1691b) to link to different Gazette issues from the same year{{sfn|Gazette|2687}}
[2] – discouraged; uses default {{
London Gazette}}
CITEREF
anchor but when issue number exceeds 4 digits {{sfn}}
rendering fails; also, this form can't be styled to properly render italicized London GazetteReferences
{{London Gazette|title=Rye, August 8|issue=2687|date=10–13 August 1691|ref={{sfnref|''London Gazette''|1691}}|mode=cs2}}
{{London Gazette|title=Rye, August 8|issue=2687|date=10–13 August 1691|mode=cs2}}
|mode=cs2
matches {{London Gazette}}
rendering style to that of {{
citation}}
.economy of space. I have always believed and said, I don't know how many times, that if quotations from sources are a necessary part of the article, those quotations should be included in the article text or in a separate footnotes section and cited accordingly. This keeps the references sections clean and concise. It is intended that short cites be just that: short.
{{sfn|''London Gazette''|1711a|loc=[https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/4948/page/1 Issue 4948, page 1]|ps=: "Whitehall, January 4. Her Majesty hath been graciously pleas'd to Constitute his Grace the Duke of Ormonde Commander of all Her Majesty's Land Forces in that part of the Kingdom of Great Britain call'd England, and Colonel of Her Majesty's First Regiment of Foot Guards. "}}
|date=
in the matching Gazette template should also include the disambiguator because printed copies of the article cannot link from short-form cite to long-form cite.the full [descriptions] appear in the list of references, perhaps a subsection of § Notes and references: §§Sources with §§§Books and §§§London Gazette (these last two could be pseudo-headings:
'''Books'''
, etc) where §Books is sorted by author-date and §London Gazette is sorted chronologically.economy of space. One way to economize on the space occupied by an article's citations is to minimize the amount of text that citations emit.
This template's documentation directs me to Wikipedia:London Gazette Index to convert dates into issue numbers, but the URLs for (at least old) issues of the Gazette are stale, because the schema has changed. See Wikipedia talk:London Gazette Index#Stale URLs. Hairy Dude ( talk) 04:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Trappist the monk said above that the default CITEREF is discouraged for technical reasons. This would seem to be at least partially solved by changing the second CITEREF parameter from issue to date, as shown in the sandbox [5]. DrKay ( talk) 14:34, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
|issue=
and sandbox using |date=
; note the ampersands in the short-form references:
CITEREFGazette33000
CITEREFGazette9_December_1924
{{
harvnb}}
or {{
sfn}}
wrapper template that accepts a single parameter (issue number) and from that creates a call to {{harvnb}}
or {{sfn}}
:
{{gazette_harvnb|33000}}
creates →
{{harvnb|Gazette No. 33000|ref=CITEREFGazette33000}}
which renders as →
There are cases where the page number is not a number and this template does not seem to produce the link correctly.
{{London Gazette|issue=6610|page=3.a.a|date=26 September 1727}}
Any chance this can be fixed? I assume allowing non-numeric page number means some ability of error detection will be removed. ネイ ( talk) 10:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I have modified Module:London Gazette util to notice when issues 1610–1619 are being linked so that the url for these issues can be either simple digits or digit+dot+alpha. At present, the alpha character is constrained to 'a' only. Are there other cases where this sort of oddball page numbering occurs?
{{London Gazette|issue=6610|page=3.a.a|date=26 September 1727}}
→
"No. 6610".
The London Gazette. 26 September 1727. p. 3.a.a.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 18:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Why does this use {{
cite magazine}}
and not {{
cite news}}
? It's always been a newspaper, it's never had pictures, colour, or glossy paper. Just the facts, in plain ordinary black text on flat white paper. The supplements are no different. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 00:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
{{
London Gazette}}
template that uses |title=
:
{{London Gazette |issue=34000 |date=1 December 1933 |pages=7765–7766 |title=Tenders for Treasury Bills}}
{{
London Gazette}}
and change -->|{{cite magazine
to -->|{{cite news
and then preview this page with that you will see that the issue is rendered as:
{{
cite magazine}}