![]() | 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 30 | ← | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | → | Archive 39 |
Could the bot be enhanced sometime to correct trivial errors like this one? Wikipedia talk:ISBN#Invalid ISBN because x is not X. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 11:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if Citation bot could help go through the backlog at Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations, if the bot is not already working on it. I do realize that the bot cannot fix all of them, such as PDF files. However, I believe the bot could help make a huge dent on this backlog that is currently over 76,000. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
|issue=0
and |issue=
swap back and forth with each and every edit
Zhou, H; Hong, M; Chai, Y; Hei, YK (2009).
"Consequences of Cytoplasmic Irradiation: Studies from Microbeam". Journal of Radiation Research. 50: A59–A65.
Bibcode:
2009JRadR..50A..59Z.
doi:
10.1269/jrr.08120S.
PMC
3664637.
PMID
19346686.
Citation bot recently fixed an typo of mine where the 'year' parameter in a citation was given as '022' instead of '2022' ( diff page). The original typo did not throw any errors (perhaps because the template accepts years with three digits?), but when the bot changed it to '22' date format errors appeared. I don't know if there is anything that can be done about this kind of typo + fix error, but I thought I'd bring it up here for you to look at. Citation bot is an awesome tool regardless. Junglenut | Talk 10:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
{{cite web/new |url=https://profiles.ala.org.au/opus/foa/profile/Pittosporum%20rubiginosum |title=''Pittosporum rubiginosum'' |last1=Cayzer |first1=Lindy W. |year=022 |editor-last1=Kodela |editor-first1=P.G. |website=[[Flora of Australia]] |publisher=[[Australian Biological Resources Study]], Department of Climate Change, the Environment and Water: Canberra |access-date=14 April 2023}}
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |year=
(
help)In this edit from a year ago the bot incorrectly changed the title of two articles to "Riemann Surfacese and Related Topics (AM-97)" and "Visions in Mathematics."
Is it ok if I block the bot from editing pages where I've already been careful on the references? I've found that it usually adds useless or incorrect info (as in the linked edit) Gumshoe2 ( talk) 03:44, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This correction was unnecessary as the correct spelling of the source title is Jezik in slovstvo. Thank you. -- TadejM my talk 20:50, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I had read that adding a language tag would prevent the bot from attempting to correct the capitalisation of foreign articles. This is a very useful bot but it combines many functions together, and for capitalisation it can cause more maintenence than it performs.
Also if you stop the bot from language overreach until it is capable, it would be good to stop it from time overreach: prevent it from operating on titles published before standardised spelling. Or add to citation templates a parameter to prevent the bot from trying to correct capitalisation.
Sorry for the trouble!
Can the bot be changed to stop adding URLs to places where |Jstor=
is populated and to move Jstor URLs into the |Jstor=
parameter? Having it duplicated as it currently does seems only to pad citations, both for the viewer and in the markup.
Ifly6 (
talk)
06:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
phab:T336298 is probably of interest to this page. Izno ( talk) 23:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
If the database is correct, the bot should edit only once, and when the bot made a mistake, they usually refer to the wrong database. SilverMatsu ( talk) 02:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daily Campus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Chances last a finite time ( talk) 14:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
The IETF Datatracker (
https://datatracker.ietf.org/) is where the IETF has links to its various documents. It is not at all a newspaper: it is a portal for links.
{{
cite IETF}}
, not {{
cite journal}}
.{{
cite IETF}}
:
{{
cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{
cite web}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite web}}
:
{{cite web}}
; source linked from |url=
has moved on to v.12 so either the value in |title=
or the value in |url=
needs an update{{
cite news}}
; source linked from |url=
has moved on to v.16 so either the value in |title=
or the value in |url=
needs an update10.17487/RFC...
doi which takes you to https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc...
. The http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc...
url redirects to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc...
so which is the real link target? At
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ right at the top is this message:
work on IETF standards. This discussion topic should probably continue elsewhere because it isn't a bot related topic.
{{
cite journal}}
and {{
cite web}}
to {{
cite IETF}}
but not {{
cite news}}
(
ref 3)? Why? Also
ref 2 and
ref 3 still have the title / url-target version mismatch. which you really ought to fix.Semantic Scholar is a product from (I think?) a for-profit company trying to insert itself into people’s scientific research process. Its links are essentially useless line noise, clicking them does not show anything that a search of the web or any citation index wouldn't also find, does not in my experience ever turn up other materials that aren't easier to find by other means. Wikipedia does not need to indiscriminately mirror every bit of corporate-produced metadata to be found on the web about every citation. All of the other miscellaneous identifiers that Citation Bot adds are also probably a net-negative, but at least they arguably sometimes include reviews etc., but the Semantic Scholar links are a total waste of space. – jacobolus (t) 23:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Shailesh Shirali has beenat the Rishi Valley School(Krishnamurti Foundationof India), Rishi Valley,Andhra Pradesh, for morethan ten years and iscurrently the Principal. Hehas been involved in theMathematical OlympiadProgramme since 1988. Hehas a deep interest intalking and writing aboutmathematics, particularlyabout its historicalaspects. He is alsointerested in problemsolving (particularly in thefields of elementarynumber theory, geometryand combinatorics).This is just a poorly formatted copy/paste of the author's bio, unrelated to content the article. The only entity benefitting from including links like this on Wikipedia is Semantic Scholar itself, at the expense of Wikipedia readers. I'd revert the edit as unhelpful but Citation Bot will just put it back again later, unless explicitly blocked from the page. – jacobolus (t) 23:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Semantic Scholar is free to use and unlike similar search engines (i.e. Google Scholar) does not search for material that is behind a paywall. -- SilverMatsu ( talk) 08:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
<ref name="FOOTNOTECorp2004a[httpsarchiveorgdetailsisbn_0198613741page787 787]"/>
. Since that reference anchor name is changed by Citation bot, the reference is now undefined and the article's referencing is broken. Citation bot doesn't check its own edits for errors, so it leaves the damage for a human to find.
The fix isn't impossible -- it is easy to detect this case, and then not make any edit. Just because the reference style is easily broken doesn't mean the bot should go around breaking it. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 14:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Here are two more edits where User:Citation bot exercised this bug: [7] and [8]. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 08:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Here is one more: [9] -- Mikeblas ( talk) 09:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
SpringerLink is a distribution plaftorm similar to
ScienceDirect. |journal=SpringerLink
should never be added to anything.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
13:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
|journal=
(or |magazine=
, |newspaper=
, |periodical=
, |website=
, |work=
) should never be added to {{
cite book}}
or an encyclopedia citation ({{
citation}}
, when it has |encyclopedia=
, or {{
cite encyclopedia}}
) ...
Bad CrossRef Meta-Data. I have flagged it on the page. Thank you for noticing.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
12:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
On June 4, 2022, the Citation Bot made a change in an article I am working on in my Sandbox (Sandbox 1) [19], which destroyed many of the citations that had been legible before (see the difference between day before: [20] and the day after [21].
While there were a few red-link problems the day before, most of the citations for the most part then were legible--but afterward most are now a red-letter mess! I went through a lot of trouble to create a special kind of Harvard notes that are able to show several different references simultaneously. I want to enter the new material from my sandbox into the main article, but I want to make sure that I have citations that look right. Could someone please help me by either reverting the citations to their previous state, or find suitable corrections. Perhaps someone could also help me fix whatever red-letter citations were there before? I know I should have let you know about this earlier, but I have not had much time over last couple of years. Admittedly, I am a writer, not tech person. I would greatly appreciate somebody's help. Thanks, Garagepunk66 ( talk) 21:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
what exactly happens?
Courtesy pings to, @
Abductive and
BorgQueen:, who both suggested this bot edit.
Flibirigit (
talk)
10:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
On 6 December 2022, Citation bot performed this edit to the Perfect (Exceeder) article, with an invalid category in the edit summary: Category:Singlechart usages for Wallonia Dance (missing space). The correct spelling is Category:Single chart usages for Wallonia Dance. I found neither categories in the article's edit history, after, or immediately leading up to said edit; only found in the edit summary. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 00:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
<ref>https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41</ref>
to <ref>{{cite journal | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41 | title="If it wasn't for Roosevelt you wouldn't have this job": The Politics of Patronage and the 1936 Presidential Election in New York | last1=Sheppard | first1=Si | journal=New York History | year=2014 | volume=95 | issue=1 | pages=41–69 | doi=10.1353/nyh.2014.0051 | s2cid=159116571 }}</ref>
|jstor=newyorkhist.95.1.41
instead of |url=
https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41
That should be in addition to the link, but yes. Do you have a diff?
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|title=Accept Terms and Conditions on JSTOR
should be marked as a bad title and replaced, and links which are like |url=
https://www.jstor.org/tc/accept?origin=%2Fstable%2Fpdf%2Fresrep29468.8.pdf&is_image=False
should be changed to
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep29468.8.pdf or
https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep29468.8. This is caused by Citoid in ViualEditor being run on that pdf-link to generate an autofilled reference. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Women%27s_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia&diff=prev&oldid=1160807260
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
22:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
In this edit, the bot added a journal parameter to a citation that already had the journal as "work", and introduced a violation of MOS:NOITALIC. Perhaps the fact that everything was hidden with "script" and "trans" was confusing the bot. I have tried to fix this by converting to script-journal and trans-journal. — Kusma ( talk) 07:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|script-work=
and |trans-work=
.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
18:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|journal=
and |series=
Seems to be GIGO, since it is not a journal, but a book series. I have fixed the citations
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
15:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
can you specify what text exactly. i cannot tell on my phone.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
11:19, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Likewise for website=publisher, magazine=publisher, work=publisher, etc... Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 17:52, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Bug: This bot putting title name randomly.
for url: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147540
activity diff;
1. Special:MobileDiff/1162321446
2. Special:MobileDiff/1157359979
MaxA-Matrix 💬 talk 13:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
For {{cite news}}, "work" is a shorter alternative for "newspaper". This is more of an unnecessary feature than a bug report. The additional five characters don't make much of a difference on short pages, but on long pages citing hundreds of news articles they add up. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Same for the other magazines.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Could you write a special url/doi parsing for these, where the last thing after the final dot in 10.1103/<JOURNAL>.83.084019 gets recognized as the article id / page number?
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
01:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
One of the journal citation templates shows an error message because a PMC you added, 10303335, is greater than 1030000. Achmad Rachmani ( talk) 03:39, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
The diff showed the changes I saved, the Bot added Series, Volume & ISBN, and usefully SCID.
I suspect that using harvnb as a title parameter to a cite book with a chapter isn't correct, though it cuts down repetition, when
multiple chapters from conference proceedings or the like are referenced. If there's a better way, please let me know.
Springer providing DOIs allowed the Bot to work. Not processing the reference if the title is a harv (or sfn?) template would be nice.
RDBrown (
talk)
12:28, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
harvc}}
SpringerLink/Springerlink, -/–
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
In the unlikely event that you are looking to diversify CBOT's scope, you may "enjoy" this a short OpEd by (London) Observer columnist, Prof John Naughton. [1] He gives a nice name check to Wikipedia and our verification standards. But what worries me is fake but convincing citations: if I see a statement cited to Nature, I am almost certain to assume good faith. No doubt you have heard of the legal case where the lawyer relied on ChatGPT to find "suitable" precedents that turned out to be complete fabrications. [2] We can't just take the easy assumption that anything published by Nature is ipso facto reliable without first checking that they did in fact publish it! Is that ever likely to be possible?-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 16:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
it's easily detectable so long as you follow the sourcesTrue, but would it occur to anyone that they needed to do it, unless the cited claim was so off the wall that you would feel obliged to verify that the article did indeed say that. I had in mind more insidious cases. I have no doubt, for example, that the precedents generated by ChatGPT were sufficiently convincing to take in a professional lawyer.
References
Seems to be a problem with linked "journals/series" Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
I notice very often that CamelCase words get weird/random spaces and italics sometimes. What gives? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
function restore_italics (string $text) : string { // <em> tags often go missing around species names in CrossRef if (str_ireplace(array('arxiv', 'ebay', 'aRMadillo', 'imac'), '', $text) !== $text) return $text; // Words with capitals in the middle, but not the first character return safe_preg_replace('~([a-z]+)([A-Z][a-z]+\b)~', "$1 ''$2''", $text); }
These are book series. If you could have a one-off run TNTing chapter/title/journal on those citations, that would be a huge boon to cleanup efforts.
The affected pages are
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:15, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
This should affect all journals starting with npj (linked or not). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 03:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
For some reason the bot missed that one.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
03:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
And I have a trouble ticket with CrossRef to see if they can fix this.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
13:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
TNT'd into a cite book with the isbn= taken from the URL (sciencedirect.com/book/9780128173428/... ; sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128161371000052). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I had already been here because the bot was adding a number on the citation as the issue when it was already cited as the volume [64]. I was told to add the note <!-- Deny Citation Bot-->. The same is happening again with another citation [65] [66]. Is there a solution to this, or would I have to just pay attention to my watchlist to see which of the articles I wrote are getting their citations altered?
At this point though I'm also questioning whether I know the difference between a volume and an issue. Super Dromaeosaurus ( talk) 08:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Recently I noticed that the bot changes links to a book that is available on Google books from the link to the title page that I put in, to a link that gives a number of snippets inside the book. Example from Jacques-Louis Comte de Noyelles My intent Frey, L.; Frey, M.L. (1995). "Noyelles et Falais, Jacques-Louis, comte de". The Treaties of the War of the Spanish Succession: An Historical and Critical Dictionary. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 312. Retrieved 4 July 2023. became Frey, L.; Frey, M.L. (1995). "Noyelles et Falais, Jacques-Louis, comte de". The Treaties of the War of the Spanish Succession: An Historical and Critical Dictionary. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 312. Retrieved 4 July 2023.. (Please click the links to see the difference in result.) The difference is that &source=gbs_navlinks_s was eliminated, but what results is very unhelpful: a number of disjointed snippets. Now, I suppose I am to file a bug report, but I am a tech ignoramus. I don't know how to provide useful information to the repair people, except by providing this example. Please help. Meanwhile I am just putting the old links back. Ereunetes ( talk) 22:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Running the bot gives this
No webservice The URL you have requested, https://citations.toolforge.org/process_page.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&page=Intelligence_amplification, is not currently serviced. If you have reached this page from somewhere else... This URI is managed by the citations tool, maintained by AManWithNoPlan , Dbarratt , Kaldari , Mattsenate , Maximilianklein , Smith609 . That tool might not have a web interface, or it may currently be disabled. If you're pretty sure this shouldn't be an error, you may wish to notify the tool's maintainers (above) about the error and how you ended up here. If you maintain this tool You have not enabled a web service for your tool, or it has stopped working because of a fatal error. Please check the error logs of your web service.
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
when i try to use citation bot via the website, it results in a 503 Service Unavailable error, why is it happening? Notrealname1234 ( talk) 23:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
<ref>https://www.jstor.org/stable/e27098396</ref>
{{
cite journal}}
That appears to be an entire issue of a journal (volume 43, issue 1, of The Great Circle). Is that really what you want to cite? If so, {{
cite journal}} is not well-suited for that; it is for journal articles, not journal issues, and requires a title of an individual article in a journal. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
22:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Previous thread: User_talk:Citation_bot/Archive_35#Request_for_removal_of_feature. I just came across the template page for "cite news" and noticed that the examples for citing news articles all use "work" ( Template:Cite_news#Usage). Isn't that enough justification for not changing "work" to "newspaper"? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
|url=
parameter.
GoingBatty (
talk)
00:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)This part if {{ notabug}} AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 19:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
|title=Optica Publishing Group
should be marked as a bad title. See
diff.
Also,
https://opg.optica.org/ome/viewmedia.cfm?uri=ome-5-11-2459&html=true should use {{
cite journal}}
and not {{
cite web}}
. Is there a way to scrape the doi etc. from that page?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
22:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
In article Tikki Tikki Tembo, Citation bot added "|author1=柳田, 国男, 1875-1962 |author2=日本放送協会" at Special:Diff/1164796262 and after being reverted with a proper edit note, keeps re-adding at Special:Diff/1165812619. As the metadata in https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1124189/1/1 states, 日本放送協会 is the editor (編), not author, which I already wrote in the "editor=" field along with "editor-link=NHK". How can I stop this? Note also that 柳田国男 is credited as "supervisor (監修)", not author. Wotheina ( talk) 01:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Achieved by TNTing title/journal (to trigger on the condition that IEEE doi (10.1109/...) or ieeexplore.ieee.org URL + ISBN?)
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
08:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
See also [73] + tnt fix Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
These are all logged and I got back and fix them by hand. The code is now good enough that the "guesses" are now on average bad (it almost never guesses now). I have just switched the code to by default NOT apply the guess. I still log them, since sometimes they are right. Also, then I add the phrase to the list of "fix this".
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
12:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
See edit. Izno ( talk) 18:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Not a bug - that template is for other bots.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
22:04, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
When running the bot in a single page it says "!Page Example_page from en.wikipedia.org appears to be empty" about 5% of the time. When run again it finds the page.
Abductive (
reasoning)
00:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
https://www.nature.com/articles/npre.2008.2088.1 and https://www.nature.com/articles/npre.2008.2088.1.pdf?proof=t has the same Nature article ID (npre.2008.2088.1), so the bot should be able to expand the PDF-link as well based on that info. See . Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 17:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
cite tech report}}
to {{
cite techreport}}
Specifially, convert
https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.22270%2Fajprd.v7i2.463 to |doi=10.22270/ajprd.v7i2.463
. But since that was already present, remove it.
Alternatively (yuck), it could be converted to https://doi.org/10.22270%2Fajprd.v7i2.463.
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The new stuff works pretty well, but there's still a few kinks.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
20:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Is Biomolecule Oxidation by Plasma-Derived Reactive Species Restricted to the Gas-Liquid Interphase?
from |title=
to |chapter=
it should have changed |url=
to |chapter-url=
(as long as the URL corresponds with the chapter title provided of course, as it did in this case).
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
21:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
|website=IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS)
since it added |title=2022 IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS)
(Not sure what's correct though regarding the year, keeping it as |year=
or including it in the |title=
.
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
21:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)See
. The bot is not consistent when using url or chapter-url. Also, it added |volume=1
if using the cite conference template, but not the book template. (Another question: Should cite book really be used, and not cite conference?)
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
00:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I've been seeing (on my watchlist) the bot convert a bunch of conference papers, formatted as journal papers with the name of the conference incorrectly set in the journal parameter, into properly formatted conference papers. Thumbs up. Seems to be working well, and a useful thing to do. — David Eppstein ( talk) 07:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
See also
[91] for other potential cleanup, though those might be much harder/impossible to automate.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:21, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
None of those have DOIs, other than one that claims to be a journal. https://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33017627. It will require some logic at the end to just stiff-arm the citation into being a book. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 22:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
According to WP:MOSSIS, boxed sister project templates do not belong in § References, due to the undesirable white space it creates. It also states that a § External links should not be created if a boxed sister project template is all that would populate it; instead, it allows using an inline template. Please review the recent revert to the Dairy cattle article, and update Citation bot to account for this situation. I have raised the issue with the user operating the bot responsible for the revert, offering an alternative plan which utilizes the inline template rather than the box template, and avoids creating § External links. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 23:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
|journal=Forhandlinger I Videnskabs-Selskabet I Christiania
|journal=Forhandlinger i Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania
|journal=42Nd Cospar Scientific Assembly
|journal=42nd Cospar Scientific Assembly
|journal=44Th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference
(should be 44th) when run on
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013LPI....44.2854S
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
|journal=Nist
|journal=NIST
NIST is not a journal so switching from {{
cite web}}
to {{
cite journal}}
is certainly the wrong thing to do.
The initial state of that template is junk anyway:
{{cite web| url = https://www.nist.gov/nist-and-nobel/dan-shechtman/nobel-moment-dan-shechtman| title = NIST and the Nobel (September 30, 2016, Updated November 17, 2019) The Nobel Moment: Dan Shechtman}}
wherein |title=
has all sorts of stuff that is not the article title: a date that belongs in |orig-date=September 30, 2016
, a date that belongs in |date=November 17, 2019
, something that might go in |department=NIST and the Nobel
.
Properly the template might be rewritten like this:
{{cite web |url=https://www.nist.gov/nist-and-nobel/dan-shechtman/nobel-moment-dan-shechtman |department=NIST and the Nobel |orig-date=September 30, 2016 |date=November 17, 2019 |title=The Nobel Moment: Dan Shechtman |website=NIST}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
For some reason, I am unable to run the bot on
Meat tenderness. Not using
https://citations.toolforge.org/process_page.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&page=Meat_tenderness
nor "the gadget button" under the editor window.
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Seems like he bot can't expand from <ref>https://www.pnas.org/content/112/43/13213.full</ref>
anymore? The link redirects to
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1420949112 - anyway we can "follow" the redirect and attempt to expand from the new source (if not dead).
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
|title=Advances in Human Factors, Business Management, Training and Education {{!}} SpringerLink
and remove the {{!}} SpringerLink
part.
However in the last diff above, I removed the content of the parameter, but left an empty |title=
before running the bot. For some reason the bot added an empty |chapter=
when adding the title again (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User%3AJosve05a%2Fsandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1168204340) - why?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
11:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Temporary issue, or something changed?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
01:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
https://doi.org/10.1023%2FA%3A1013152407425
:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Diseases_and_epidemics_of_the_19th_century&diff=prev&oldid=1168190851.This edit seems like a bug. Isn't the whole point of 'doi-broken-date' to identify the earliest known time when the DOI was broken? Arbitrarily changing it to a later value seems like it removes whatever useful information that attribute contained. – jacobolus (t) 16:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
If the doi link is broken, then use of doi-broken-date unlinks the doi value, indicates when the doi-problem was first noticed, and will also add the page to "CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of Mmmm YYYY" (tracking category Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive)– jacobolus (t) 16:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I've noticed that Citoid adds months (and sometimes incorrectly dates, by specifying the first day of a specific month) as well as ISSN for journals, which is not something that Citation bot does (it only adds years and no ISSN). Are there any best practices if months should be specified for journals or not (it is available through Crossref for many journals) as well as ISSN for publications? Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 07:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Journal ABC (ISSN 1234-5678)
in my opinion, since it is the publication's identifier, and not the article's. But, II digress...
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
07:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OSdNEAAAQBAJ}}
expands to
The publisher, Scribner UK, should be added with |publisher=Scribner UK
We ignore that data, since it seems to be not very reliable. No idea when this code was added, or why.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
13:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
// Possibly contains dud information on occasion // $this->add_if_new('publisher', str_replace("___", ":", $xml->dc___publisher));
I'm not sure if having the supplement in the issue value is correct or not, but it seemed weird that the bot added in the parameter without removing it from the volume name, this could potentially be a GIGO scenario, not certain though. --
Lightlowemon (
talk)
05:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | → | Archive 39 |
Could the bot be enhanced sometime to correct trivial errors like this one? Wikipedia talk:ISBN#Invalid ISBN because x is not X. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 11:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if Citation bot could help go through the backlog at Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations, if the bot is not already working on it. I do realize that the bot cannot fix all of them, such as PDF files. However, I believe the bot could help make a huge dent on this backlog that is currently over 76,000. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
|issue=0
and |issue=
swap back and forth with each and every edit
Zhou, H; Hong, M; Chai, Y; Hei, YK (2009).
"Consequences of Cytoplasmic Irradiation: Studies from Microbeam". Journal of Radiation Research. 50: A59–A65.
Bibcode:
2009JRadR..50A..59Z.
doi:
10.1269/jrr.08120S.
PMC
3664637.
PMID
19346686.
Citation bot recently fixed an typo of mine where the 'year' parameter in a citation was given as '022' instead of '2022' ( diff page). The original typo did not throw any errors (perhaps because the template accepts years with three digits?), but when the bot changed it to '22' date format errors appeared. I don't know if there is anything that can be done about this kind of typo + fix error, but I thought I'd bring it up here for you to look at. Citation bot is an awesome tool regardless. Junglenut | Talk 10:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
{{cite web/new |url=https://profiles.ala.org.au/opus/foa/profile/Pittosporum%20rubiginosum |title=''Pittosporum rubiginosum'' |last1=Cayzer |first1=Lindy W. |year=022 |editor-last1=Kodela |editor-first1=P.G. |website=[[Flora of Australia]] |publisher=[[Australian Biological Resources Study]], Department of Climate Change, the Environment and Water: Canberra |access-date=14 April 2023}}
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |year=
(
help)In this edit from a year ago the bot incorrectly changed the title of two articles to "Riemann Surfacese and Related Topics (AM-97)" and "Visions in Mathematics."
Is it ok if I block the bot from editing pages where I've already been careful on the references? I've found that it usually adds useless or incorrect info (as in the linked edit) Gumshoe2 ( talk) 03:44, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This correction was unnecessary as the correct spelling of the source title is Jezik in slovstvo. Thank you. -- TadejM my talk 20:50, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I had read that adding a language tag would prevent the bot from attempting to correct the capitalisation of foreign articles. This is a very useful bot but it combines many functions together, and for capitalisation it can cause more maintenence than it performs.
Also if you stop the bot from language overreach until it is capable, it would be good to stop it from time overreach: prevent it from operating on titles published before standardised spelling. Or add to citation templates a parameter to prevent the bot from trying to correct capitalisation.
Sorry for the trouble!
Can the bot be changed to stop adding URLs to places where |Jstor=
is populated and to move Jstor URLs into the |Jstor=
parameter? Having it duplicated as it currently does seems only to pad citations, both for the viewer and in the markup.
Ifly6 (
talk)
06:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
phab:T336298 is probably of interest to this page. Izno ( talk) 23:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
If the database is correct, the bot should edit only once, and when the bot made a mistake, they usually refer to the wrong database. SilverMatsu ( talk) 02:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daily Campus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Chances last a finite time ( talk) 14:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
The IETF Datatracker (
https://datatracker.ietf.org/) is where the IETF has links to its various documents. It is not at all a newspaper: it is a portal for links.
{{
cite IETF}}
, not {{
cite journal}}
.{{
cite IETF}}
:
{{
cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{
cite web}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite journal}}
{{cite web}}
:
{{cite web}}
; source linked from |url=
has moved on to v.12 so either the value in |title=
or the value in |url=
needs an update{{
cite news}}
; source linked from |url=
has moved on to v.16 so either the value in |title=
or the value in |url=
needs an update10.17487/RFC...
doi which takes you to https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc...
. The http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc...
url redirects to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc...
so which is the real link target? At
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ right at the top is this message:
work on IETF standards. This discussion topic should probably continue elsewhere because it isn't a bot related topic.
{{
cite journal}}
and {{
cite web}}
to {{
cite IETF}}
but not {{
cite news}}
(
ref 3)? Why? Also
ref 2 and
ref 3 still have the title / url-target version mismatch. which you really ought to fix.Semantic Scholar is a product from (I think?) a for-profit company trying to insert itself into people’s scientific research process. Its links are essentially useless line noise, clicking them does not show anything that a search of the web or any citation index wouldn't also find, does not in my experience ever turn up other materials that aren't easier to find by other means. Wikipedia does not need to indiscriminately mirror every bit of corporate-produced metadata to be found on the web about every citation. All of the other miscellaneous identifiers that Citation Bot adds are also probably a net-negative, but at least they arguably sometimes include reviews etc., but the Semantic Scholar links are a total waste of space. – jacobolus (t) 23:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Shailesh Shirali has beenat the Rishi Valley School(Krishnamurti Foundationof India), Rishi Valley,Andhra Pradesh, for morethan ten years and iscurrently the Principal. Hehas been involved in theMathematical OlympiadProgramme since 1988. Hehas a deep interest intalking and writing aboutmathematics, particularlyabout its historicalaspects. He is alsointerested in problemsolving (particularly in thefields of elementarynumber theory, geometryand combinatorics).This is just a poorly formatted copy/paste of the author's bio, unrelated to content the article. The only entity benefitting from including links like this on Wikipedia is Semantic Scholar itself, at the expense of Wikipedia readers. I'd revert the edit as unhelpful but Citation Bot will just put it back again later, unless explicitly blocked from the page. – jacobolus (t) 23:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Semantic Scholar is free to use and unlike similar search engines (i.e. Google Scholar) does not search for material that is behind a paywall. -- SilverMatsu ( talk) 08:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
<ref name="FOOTNOTECorp2004a[httpsarchiveorgdetailsisbn_0198613741page787 787]"/>
. Since that reference anchor name is changed by Citation bot, the reference is now undefined and the article's referencing is broken. Citation bot doesn't check its own edits for errors, so it leaves the damage for a human to find.
The fix isn't impossible -- it is easy to detect this case, and then not make any edit. Just because the reference style is easily broken doesn't mean the bot should go around breaking it. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 14:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Here are two more edits where User:Citation bot exercised this bug: [7] and [8]. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 08:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Here is one more: [9] -- Mikeblas ( talk) 09:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
SpringerLink is a distribution plaftorm similar to
ScienceDirect. |journal=SpringerLink
should never be added to anything.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
13:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
|journal=
(or |magazine=
, |newspaper=
, |periodical=
, |website=
, |work=
) should never be added to {{
cite book}}
or an encyclopedia citation ({{
citation}}
, when it has |encyclopedia=
, or {{
cite encyclopedia}}
) ...
Bad CrossRef Meta-Data. I have flagged it on the page. Thank you for noticing.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
12:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
On June 4, 2022, the Citation Bot made a change in an article I am working on in my Sandbox (Sandbox 1) [19], which destroyed many of the citations that had been legible before (see the difference between day before: [20] and the day after [21].
While there were a few red-link problems the day before, most of the citations for the most part then were legible--but afterward most are now a red-letter mess! I went through a lot of trouble to create a special kind of Harvard notes that are able to show several different references simultaneously. I want to enter the new material from my sandbox into the main article, but I want to make sure that I have citations that look right. Could someone please help me by either reverting the citations to their previous state, or find suitable corrections. Perhaps someone could also help me fix whatever red-letter citations were there before? I know I should have let you know about this earlier, but I have not had much time over last couple of years. Admittedly, I am a writer, not tech person. I would greatly appreciate somebody's help. Thanks, Garagepunk66 ( talk) 21:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
what exactly happens?
Courtesy pings to, @
Abductive and
BorgQueen:, who both suggested this bot edit.
Flibirigit (
talk)
10:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
On 6 December 2022, Citation bot performed this edit to the Perfect (Exceeder) article, with an invalid category in the edit summary: Category:Singlechart usages for Wallonia Dance (missing space). The correct spelling is Category:Single chart usages for Wallonia Dance. I found neither categories in the article's edit history, after, or immediately leading up to said edit; only found in the edit summary. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 00:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
<ref>https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41</ref>
to <ref>{{cite journal | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41 | title="If it wasn't for Roosevelt you wouldn't have this job": The Politics of Patronage and the 1936 Presidential Election in New York | last1=Sheppard | first1=Si | journal=New York History | year=2014 | volume=95 | issue=1 | pages=41–69 | doi=10.1353/nyh.2014.0051 | s2cid=159116571 }}</ref>
|jstor=newyorkhist.95.1.41
instead of |url=
https://www.jstor.org/stable/newyorkhist.95.1.41
That should be in addition to the link, but yes. Do you have a diff?
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|title=Accept Terms and Conditions on JSTOR
should be marked as a bad title and replaced, and links which are like |url=
https://www.jstor.org/tc/accept?origin=%2Fstable%2Fpdf%2Fresrep29468.8.pdf&is_image=False
should be changed to
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep29468.8.pdf or
https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep29468.8. This is caused by Citoid in ViualEditor being run on that pdf-link to generate an autofilled reference. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Women%27s_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia&diff=prev&oldid=1160807260
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
22:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
In this edit, the bot added a journal parameter to a citation that already had the journal as "work", and introduced a violation of MOS:NOITALIC. Perhaps the fact that everything was hidden with "script" and "trans" was confusing the bot. I have tried to fix this by converting to script-journal and trans-journal. — Kusma ( talk) 07:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|script-work=
and |trans-work=
.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
18:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
|journal=
and |series=
Seems to be GIGO, since it is not a journal, but a book series. I have fixed the citations
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
15:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
can you specify what text exactly. i cannot tell on my phone.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
11:19, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Likewise for website=publisher, magazine=publisher, work=publisher, etc... Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 17:52, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Bug: This bot putting title name randomly.
for url: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147540
activity diff;
1. Special:MobileDiff/1162321446
2. Special:MobileDiff/1157359979
MaxA-Matrix 💬 talk 13:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
For {{cite news}}, "work" is a shorter alternative for "newspaper". This is more of an unnecessary feature than a bug report. The additional five characters don't make much of a difference on short pages, but on long pages citing hundreds of news articles they add up. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Same for the other magazines.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Could you write a special url/doi parsing for these, where the last thing after the final dot in 10.1103/<JOURNAL>.83.084019 gets recognized as the article id / page number?
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
01:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
One of the journal citation templates shows an error message because a PMC you added, 10303335, is greater than 1030000. Achmad Rachmani ( talk) 03:39, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
The diff showed the changes I saved, the Bot added Series, Volume & ISBN, and usefully SCID.
I suspect that using harvnb as a title parameter to a cite book with a chapter isn't correct, though it cuts down repetition, when
multiple chapters from conference proceedings or the like are referenced. If there's a better way, please let me know.
Springer providing DOIs allowed the Bot to work. Not processing the reference if the title is a harv (or sfn?) template would be nice.
RDBrown (
talk)
12:28, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
harvc}}
SpringerLink/Springerlink, -/–
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
In the unlikely event that you are looking to diversify CBOT's scope, you may "enjoy" this a short OpEd by (London) Observer columnist, Prof John Naughton. [1] He gives a nice name check to Wikipedia and our verification standards. But what worries me is fake but convincing citations: if I see a statement cited to Nature, I am almost certain to assume good faith. No doubt you have heard of the legal case where the lawyer relied on ChatGPT to find "suitable" precedents that turned out to be complete fabrications. [2] We can't just take the easy assumption that anything published by Nature is ipso facto reliable without first checking that they did in fact publish it! Is that ever likely to be possible?-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 16:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
it's easily detectable so long as you follow the sourcesTrue, but would it occur to anyone that they needed to do it, unless the cited claim was so off the wall that you would feel obliged to verify that the article did indeed say that. I had in mind more insidious cases. I have no doubt, for example, that the precedents generated by ChatGPT were sufficiently convincing to take in a professional lawyer.
References
Seems to be a problem with linked "journals/series" Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
I notice very often that CamelCase words get weird/random spaces and italics sometimes. What gives? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
function restore_italics (string $text) : string { // <em> tags often go missing around species names in CrossRef if (str_ireplace(array('arxiv', 'ebay', 'aRMadillo', 'imac'), '', $text) !== $text) return $text; // Words with capitals in the middle, but not the first character return safe_preg_replace('~([a-z]+)([A-Z][a-z]+\b)~', "$1 ''$2''", $text); }
These are book series. If you could have a one-off run TNTing chapter/title/journal on those citations, that would be a huge boon to cleanup efforts.
The affected pages are
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:15, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
This should affect all journals starting with npj (linked or not). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 03:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
For some reason the bot missed that one.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
03:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
And I have a trouble ticket with CrossRef to see if they can fix this.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
13:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
TNT'd into a cite book with the isbn= taken from the URL (sciencedirect.com/book/9780128173428/... ; sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128161371000052). Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I had already been here because the bot was adding a number on the citation as the issue when it was already cited as the volume [64]. I was told to add the note <!-- Deny Citation Bot-->. The same is happening again with another citation [65] [66]. Is there a solution to this, or would I have to just pay attention to my watchlist to see which of the articles I wrote are getting their citations altered?
At this point though I'm also questioning whether I know the difference between a volume and an issue. Super Dromaeosaurus ( talk) 08:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Recently I noticed that the bot changes links to a book that is available on Google books from the link to the title page that I put in, to a link that gives a number of snippets inside the book. Example from Jacques-Louis Comte de Noyelles My intent Frey, L.; Frey, M.L. (1995). "Noyelles et Falais, Jacques-Louis, comte de". The Treaties of the War of the Spanish Succession: An Historical and Critical Dictionary. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 312. Retrieved 4 July 2023. became Frey, L.; Frey, M.L. (1995). "Noyelles et Falais, Jacques-Louis, comte de". The Treaties of the War of the Spanish Succession: An Historical and Critical Dictionary. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 312. Retrieved 4 July 2023.. (Please click the links to see the difference in result.) The difference is that &source=gbs_navlinks_s was eliminated, but what results is very unhelpful: a number of disjointed snippets. Now, I suppose I am to file a bug report, but I am a tech ignoramus. I don't know how to provide useful information to the repair people, except by providing this example. Please help. Meanwhile I am just putting the old links back. Ereunetes ( talk) 22:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Running the bot gives this
No webservice The URL you have requested, https://citations.toolforge.org/process_page.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&page=Intelligence_amplification, is not currently serviced. If you have reached this page from somewhere else... This URI is managed by the citations tool, maintained by AManWithNoPlan , Dbarratt , Kaldari , Mattsenate , Maximilianklein , Smith609 . That tool might not have a web interface, or it may currently be disabled. If you're pretty sure this shouldn't be an error, you may wish to notify the tool's maintainers (above) about the error and how you ended up here. If you maintain this tool You have not enabled a web service for your tool, or it has stopped working because of a fatal error. Please check the error logs of your web service.
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
when i try to use citation bot via the website, it results in a 503 Service Unavailable error, why is it happening? Notrealname1234 ( talk) 23:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
<ref>https://www.jstor.org/stable/e27098396</ref>
{{
cite journal}}
That appears to be an entire issue of a journal (volume 43, issue 1, of The Great Circle). Is that really what you want to cite? If so, {{
cite journal}} is not well-suited for that; it is for journal articles, not journal issues, and requires a title of an individual article in a journal. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
22:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Previous thread: User_talk:Citation_bot/Archive_35#Request_for_removal_of_feature. I just came across the template page for "cite news" and noticed that the examples for citing news articles all use "work" ( Template:Cite_news#Usage). Isn't that enough justification for not changing "work" to "newspaper"? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
|url=
parameter.
GoingBatty (
talk)
00:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)This part if {{ notabug}} AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 19:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
|title=Optica Publishing Group
should be marked as a bad title. See
diff.
Also,
https://opg.optica.org/ome/viewmedia.cfm?uri=ome-5-11-2459&html=true should use {{
cite journal}}
and not {{
cite web}}
. Is there a way to scrape the doi etc. from that page?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
22:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
In article Tikki Tikki Tembo, Citation bot added "|author1=柳田, 国男, 1875-1962 |author2=日本放送協会" at Special:Diff/1164796262 and after being reverted with a proper edit note, keeps re-adding at Special:Diff/1165812619. As the metadata in https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1124189/1/1 states, 日本放送協会 is the editor (編), not author, which I already wrote in the "editor=" field along with "editor-link=NHK". How can I stop this? Note also that 柳田国男 is credited as "supervisor (監修)", not author. Wotheina ( talk) 01:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Achieved by TNTing title/journal (to trigger on the condition that IEEE doi (10.1109/...) or ieeexplore.ieee.org URL + ISBN?)
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
08:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
See also [73] + tnt fix Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
These are all logged and I got back and fix them by hand. The code is now good enough that the "guesses" are now on average bad (it almost never guesses now). I have just switched the code to by default NOT apply the guess. I still log them, since sometimes they are right. Also, then I add the phrase to the list of "fix this".
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
12:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
See edit. Izno ( talk) 18:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Not a bug - that template is for other bots.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
22:04, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
When running the bot in a single page it says "!Page Example_page from en.wikipedia.org appears to be empty" about 5% of the time. When run again it finds the page.
Abductive (
reasoning)
00:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
https://www.nature.com/articles/npre.2008.2088.1 and https://www.nature.com/articles/npre.2008.2088.1.pdf?proof=t has the same Nature article ID (npre.2008.2088.1), so the bot should be able to expand the PDF-link as well based on that info. See . Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 17:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
cite tech report}}
to {{
cite techreport}}
Specifially, convert
https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.22270%2Fajprd.v7i2.463 to |doi=10.22270/ajprd.v7i2.463
. But since that was already present, remove it.
Alternatively (yuck), it could be converted to https://doi.org/10.22270%2Fajprd.v7i2.463.
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The new stuff works pretty well, but there's still a few kinks.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
20:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Is Biomolecule Oxidation by Plasma-Derived Reactive Species Restricted to the Gas-Liquid Interphase?
from |title=
to |chapter=
it should have changed |url=
to |chapter-url=
(as long as the URL corresponds with the chapter title provided of course, as it did in this case).
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
21:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
|website=IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS)
since it added |title=2022 IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS)
(Not sure what's correct though regarding the year, keeping it as |year=
or including it in the |title=
.
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
21:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)See
. The bot is not consistent when using url or chapter-url. Also, it added |volume=1
if using the cite conference template, but not the book template. (Another question: Should cite book really be used, and not cite conference?)
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
00:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I've been seeing (on my watchlist) the bot convert a bunch of conference papers, formatted as journal papers with the name of the conference incorrectly set in the journal parameter, into properly formatted conference papers. Thumbs up. Seems to be working well, and a useful thing to do. — David Eppstein ( talk) 07:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
See also
[91] for other potential cleanup, though those might be much harder/impossible to automate.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
22:21, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
None of those have DOIs, other than one that claims to be a journal. https://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33017627. It will require some logic at the end to just stiff-arm the citation into being a book. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 22:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
According to WP:MOSSIS, boxed sister project templates do not belong in § References, due to the undesirable white space it creates. It also states that a § External links should not be created if a boxed sister project template is all that would populate it; instead, it allows using an inline template. Please review the recent revert to the Dairy cattle article, and update Citation bot to account for this situation. I have raised the issue with the user operating the bot responsible for the revert, offering an alternative plan which utilizes the inline template rather than the box template, and avoids creating § External links. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 23:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
|journal=Forhandlinger I Videnskabs-Selskabet I Christiania
|journal=Forhandlinger i Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania
|journal=42Nd Cospar Scientific Assembly
|journal=42nd Cospar Scientific Assembly
|journal=44Th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference
(should be 44th) when run on
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013LPI....44.2854S
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
|journal=Nist
|journal=NIST
NIST is not a journal so switching from {{
cite web}}
to {{
cite journal}}
is certainly the wrong thing to do.
The initial state of that template is junk anyway:
{{cite web| url = https://www.nist.gov/nist-and-nobel/dan-shechtman/nobel-moment-dan-shechtman| title = NIST and the Nobel (September 30, 2016, Updated November 17, 2019) The Nobel Moment: Dan Shechtman}}
wherein |title=
has all sorts of stuff that is not the article title: a date that belongs in |orig-date=September 30, 2016
, a date that belongs in |date=November 17, 2019
, something that might go in |department=NIST and the Nobel
.
Properly the template might be rewritten like this:
{{cite web |url=https://www.nist.gov/nist-and-nobel/dan-shechtman/nobel-moment-dan-shechtman |department=NIST and the Nobel |orig-date=September 30, 2016 |date=November 17, 2019 |title=The Nobel Moment: Dan Shechtman |website=NIST}}
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 22:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
For some reason, I am unable to run the bot on
Meat tenderness. Not using
https://citations.toolforge.org/process_page.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&page=Meat_tenderness
nor "the gadget button" under the editor window.
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Seems like he bot can't expand from <ref>https://www.pnas.org/content/112/43/13213.full</ref>
anymore? The link redirects to
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1420949112 - anyway we can "follow" the redirect and attempt to expand from the new source (if not dead).
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
23:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
|title=Advances in Human Factors, Business Management, Training and Education {{!}} SpringerLink
and remove the {{!}} SpringerLink
part.
However in the last diff above, I removed the content of the parameter, but left an empty |title=
before running the bot. For some reason the bot added an empty |chapter=
when adding the title again (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User%3AJosve05a%2Fsandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1168204340) - why?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
11:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Temporary issue, or something changed?
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
01:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
https://doi.org/10.1023%2FA%3A1013152407425
:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Diseases_and_epidemics_of_the_19th_century&diff=prev&oldid=1168190851.This edit seems like a bug. Isn't the whole point of 'doi-broken-date' to identify the earliest known time when the DOI was broken? Arbitrarily changing it to a later value seems like it removes whatever useful information that attribute contained. – jacobolus (t) 16:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
If the doi link is broken, then use of doi-broken-date unlinks the doi value, indicates when the doi-problem was first noticed, and will also add the page to "CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of Mmmm YYYY" (tracking category Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive)– jacobolus (t) 16:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I've noticed that Citoid adds months (and sometimes incorrectly dates, by specifying the first day of a specific month) as well as ISSN for journals, which is not something that Citation bot does (it only adds years and no ISSN). Are there any best practices if months should be specified for journals or not (it is available through Crossref for many journals) as well as ISSN for publications? Jonatan Svensson Glad ( talk) 07:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Journal ABC (ISSN 1234-5678)
in my opinion, since it is the publication's identifier, and not the article's. But, II digress...
Jonatan Svensson Glad (
talk)
07:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OSdNEAAAQBAJ}}
expands to
The publisher, Scribner UK, should be added with |publisher=Scribner UK
We ignore that data, since it seems to be not very reliable. No idea when this code was added, or why.
AManWithNoPlan (
talk)
13:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
// Possibly contains dud information on occasion // $this->add_if_new('publisher', str_replace("___", ":", $xml->dc___publisher));
I'm not sure if having the supplement in the issue value is correct or not, but it seemed weird that the bot added in the parameter without removing it from the volume name, this could potentially be a GIGO scenario, not certain though. --
Lightlowemon (
talk)
05:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)