Help talk:Citation Style 1
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Help:Citation Style 1 and the CS1 templates page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95Auto-archiving period: 20 days ![]() |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, the talk pages for all Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2 templates and modules redirect here. A list of those talk pages and their historical archives can be found here. |
![]() | This help page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Other talk page banners | |||
|
Another generic pseudo-author to detect and warn about
[edit]"Newsroom" (or "newsroom", "News-room", "news-room", "News Room", "News room", "news room"). I've encounted this in |last=
at least twice in the last month or so. Might need to flag "News" by itself, too, though I guess it's conceivable for someone to be named something like "Janet News". I know for a fact that Room is an extant surname. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 11:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- That reminds me that I keep running into "Company" in
|last=
and was a bit surprised it's not considered a generic name. Aninsource:
search yielded around 1000 hits, including maybe 30% false positives because I didn't want to pound the servers with a regex to escape the=
. A quick scroll through the first 500 results showed a single valid usage as a surname, at Ziphosuchia, with the balance of true positives consisting of publishing companies misparsed by Citoid and pals. Folly Mox (talk) 11:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)- We might add a test to find only
Company
orcompany
as whole values. If someone cares to check the results of this search if may be possible to loosen the restriction so that the test finds names that includeCompany
orcompany
. Corporate authors are allowed so I don't think that we can error when a name simply includesCompany
orcompany
. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the inclarity, but yes I meant specifically just
|last=Company
, without involving substring matching. Folly Mox (talk) 21:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)- User:DreamRimmer has taken care of the largest single offender in this category of error following a request at WP:AWBREQ. A search for
insource:"last Company first"
now returns only around 350 matches, although of course it misses cases where the parameters are in a different order. The one author we cite whose actual human surname is "Company" is cited in at least three articles as it turns out, the other two being Ischyrochampsa and Wanosuchus (I note to myself for future double parentheses). Folly Mox (talk) 00:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- User:DreamRimmer has taken care of the largest single offender in this category of error following a request at WP:AWBREQ. A search for
- Sorry for the inclarity, but yes I meant specifically just
- We might add a test to find only
- Before timing out, this search found ~2040 articles that have
|lastn=
or|authorn=
parameters with values that beginNews
ornews
. When I ran that search, I found: Newsby, Newsinger, Newsom, Newsome, Newstead, Newsum among the first 20 results; some of them multiple times. So our generic name search is limited to finding onlyNews
ornews
as whole values to avoid false positives. - For the others that you name:
- Adding a specific test for
Newsroom
andnewsroom
seems worthwhile; the others, not. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Another that you all should look at is
|lastn=Bureau
or|authorn=Bureau
. This search fund about 8300 articles where the assigned value begins withBureau
. Of those about 6680 hold only the wordBureau
. There are authors whose surname isBureau
. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Added tests for
bureau
andcompany
as whole values; added test for the various forms ofnewsroom
named in the OP where the word(s) may appear anywhere in the parameter value:{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Bureau}}
→ Bureau. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Bureau}}
→ Bureau drawer. Title.{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Company}}
→ Company. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Company}}
→ Mega Huge Company. Title.{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Newsroom}}
→ Newsroom. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=News room}}
→ News room. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=News-room}}
→ News-room. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=The News Room}}
→ The News Room. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help)
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- And one more:
Desk
whole word: - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- And two more:
Group
andLimited
both whole word:{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Group}}
→ Group. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Group photo}}
→ Group photo. Title.{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Limited}}
→ Limited. Title.{{cite book}}
:|last=
has generic name (help){{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Limited availability}}
→ Limited availability. Title.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Another worth considering is
correspondent
as the only entry in an author field. Currently 515 occurances. Keith D (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2024 (UTC)- This search suggests rather more than 500 articles with
correspondent
in|authorn=
or|lastn=
: - Added:
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- This search suggests rather more than 500 articles with
- And another? What about
|last=staff
? Before it times out, this search finds about 19,500 articles where|last=authorn
or|lastn=
is assigned the single valueStaff
orstaff
. Is 19,500+ to much to dump into Category:CS1 errors: generic name (23,397)? Certainly we could write an awb script to remove parameters that are assigned the single valueStaff
. The script must also remove matching|firstn=
when present. - Displaying 'Staff' as an author name seems to me contrary to our past advice where we used to recommended
|author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.-->
which seemed to implicitly suggest that we should not be using 'Staff' as an author name. At this edit in November 2016, pursuant to this discussion we changed the recommended hidden text. It also seems to me that specifically naming 'Staff' as an author doesn't make it any easier for readers to locate a source because that name is too generic.Staff
then amounts to pointless clutter. As an alternate option we could have the awb script convertStaff
to<!--Not stated-->
. This same awb task could also be used to replace<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.-->
with<!--Not stated-->
. - What do?
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Access dates
[edit]I request making parameter access-date to be used if there is a DOI or a PMID. Currently an error appears with an access date parameter without a URL, meaning the "|access-date=2015-02-11" part has to be in an HTML comment outside of the template (cf., inter alia, Desmarestiales).
Having no need for a URL for an access date to be used helps when one uses a book (or a book chapter, if the book is there but some chapters are not) or a journal article that is not accessible online, for it was not uploaded.
An alternative solution would be to have a URL or a DOI, or a HDL, or a PMCID, or a PMID to be required to make the access date able to be used. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 08:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- These would be completely pointless. doi:10.1086/392675, for example, will always refer to a paper published in March 1999. That you read it on January 4, 2014, March 28, 2022, or July 1, 2024, is completely inconsequential. Same for all other identifiers. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Alfa-ketosav,
|access-date=
is intended only for sources whose content is likely to change over time, so people can locate the cited version in archives. Stable identifiers point to content that doesn't change. What do you feel the benefit is to adding this datum to stable sources? Folly Mox (talk) 10:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)- If the URLs DOIs point to change, or a journal's website shuts down, it may be possible that a DOI breaks, even if only for a short time. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 11:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
oclc, issn, & eissn identifier prefixes
[edit]Editor Uzume, where is the discussion about these changes?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: right here, apparently. —Uzume (talk) 11:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing happens here without we discuss it. Please justify these changes. To me, the current url prefixes are easier for human readers to interpret, especially the prefix for OCLC. The current prefix clearly indicates what the worldcat url points to:
https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/
can easily be read by humans as an OCLC identifier url;https://search.worldcat.org/title/
cannot. - Is there any indication from worldcat that the current prefixes are about to become unsupported?
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 11:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: I would be curious what documentation you might find on the subject. As far as I know there is no indication that the current prefixes will continue to be supported either but they do still work for the time being. —Uzume (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- You are the editor who wants this change so the burden of demonstrating its necessity falls to you.
- For a bit of history of the OCLC prefix:
- 2006-09-12: included in
{{OCLC}}
at the creation of that template (http://worldcat.org/oclc/
) - 2012-08-27: introduced to Module:Citation at this edit (as protocol relative
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/
) - 2013-02-19: included in Module:Citation/CS1 at the creation of that module (also protocol relative)
- 2013-04-07: moved to Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at this edit (also protocol relative)
- 2023-02-09: switched from protocol relative to https scheme at this edit (
https://worldcat.org/oclc/
)
- 2006-09-12: included in
- I acknowledge that past performance is no predictor of future existence. I wonder how often worldcat's internal remapping of the OCLC urls has changed in the 18 or so years since en.wiki started linking to that service.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: I do not want the change but change has a way of always coming whether we want it or not. I think the burden is on OCLC but at some point we will likely have to deal with changes at WorldCat. Feel free to delay it or ignore it. I was just trying to get ahead of what might break in the future. I took the time to make the changes. If people want to throw them away I do not mind. —Uzume (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: I suppose the biggest argument for such links is that if one goes to such a record, e.g.,
{{OCLC search link|22239204}}
→ 22239204 (and yes, @Folly Mox the template is called "OCLC search link" so it is a search), then that page has a button for sharing a link to the record and from there, an item entitled "Copy link" which presumably is the link WorldCat recommends people use. And that yields: https://search.worldcat.org/en/title/22239204, providing the link prefix ofhttps://search.worldcat.org/en/title/
before the identifier to be linked to. So, perhaps I failed to get the URL correct and did not specify the "en" English UI (I tested and links like https://search.worldcat.org/ja/title/22239204 link to the same record with a Japanese UI). Please feel free to update the link prefixes appropriately. Incidentally, that very same record also has a "show more information" link that provides more information and within that it links to the "Online version" of the represented item. That link points to https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=no:701649298 providing a means to get to items via their search query. Perhaps you'd prefer that link prefix ashttps://search.worldcat.org/search?q=no:
for OCLC searches directly aligns with the linkprefix https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=n2:
for ISSN searches. —Uzume (talk) 21:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: I would be curious what documentation you might find on the subject. As far as I know there is no indication that the current prefixes will continue to be supported either but they do still work for the time being. —Uzume (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it makes sense for an identifier to link to a
search
. Jmo. Folly Mox (talk) 14:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)- I've reverted the recent changes to identifier templates and infoboxes pending the outcome of this discussion Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Your powers of reversion are amazing as always. Incidentally, at least with respect to ISSN, the change to use a search URL was discussed at Template talk:ISSN#Change request, requested by an editor without an account (IP user) and made by @MSGJ with 415549762 back in 2011-02-23 (more than 13 years ago at the time of this writing). —Uzume (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Perhaps you'd prefer moving to issn.org as per your 942292297 in Feb 2020. I think that is a great idea. —Uzume (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Your powers of reversion are amazing as always. Incidentally, at least with respect to ISSN, the change to use a search URL was discussed at Template talk:ISSN#Change request, requested by an editor without an account (IP user) and made by @MSGJ with 415549762 back in 2011-02-23 (more than 13 years ago at the time of this writing). —Uzume (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Folly Mox: Why not? When you select such a link you are searching their federated union catalogue for that identifier (either their OCLC control number/WorldCat title ID or an ISSN). —Uzume (talk) 14:44, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I understand that https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/identifier resolves to https://search.worldcat.org/title/identifier, but as Trappist said above, humans might parse it differently on sight. For me personally, it gives the feeling that we don't actually know the OCLC identifier, and to people unfamiliar with the system entirely, they might not make the connexion between
search.worldcat.org
and OCLC. I don't feel particularly strongly about this, and have no opinion whatsoever about the ISSN bits, since I rarely include them and never click through on them. Folly Mox (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I understand that https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/identifier resolves to https://search.worldcat.org/title/identifier, but as Trappist said above, humans might parse it differently on sight. For me personally, it gives the feeling that we don't actually know the OCLC identifier, and to people unfamiliar with the system entirely, they might not make the connexion between
- I've reverted the recent changes to identifier templates and infoboxes pending the outcome of this discussion Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing happens here without we discuss it. Please justify these changes. To me, the current url prefixes are easier for human readers to interpret, especially the prefix for OCLC. The current prefix clearly indicates what the worldcat url points to:
"cite proceedings" ignores issue
[edit]I wanted to cite this: http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/documents/Research/RAF-Historical-Society-Journals/Journal-11-Sir%20Frank-Cooper-on-Air-Force-Policy-in-the-1950s-1960s.pdf ("THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY, Issue No 11"), but {{cite proceedings}}
ignores the |issue=
parameter. The only supported parameter seems to be |volume=
, but it unconditionally adds "Vol." and complains "|volume= has extra text" about anything that is not a plain digital number. Can the proper output be achieved using currently existing templates, or {{cite proceedings}}
needs to be modified (then please do)? — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 18:10, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Use cite journal. Cite proceedings is for conference proceedings. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:37, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
{{cite journal}}
requires both|title=
and|journal=
, but I need to cite the whole publication. And it's not a journal issue but really proceedings from their symposium (which "in modern usage, [means] an academic conference or meeting, such as a scientific conference"). — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)- That looks like a journal with "proceedings" as part of its title (as many journals have), not a proceedings of a conference, to me. You should use cite journal for any paper published within it. It is not generally useful to cite whole issues of journals, but maybe the editorial is what you want to cite. As for the symposium: the editorial makes clear that this issue of this journal is filled with some but not all papers from the symposium. It is not the proceedings of the symposium (a book of all the papers from the symposium). It is an issue of a journal (the proceedings of the society) that happens to contain many but not all papers from a symposium with a different name. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
{{cite proceedings}}
is a redirect to{{cite conference}}
.{{cite conference}}
is screwy (because no one has ever complained enough?). It will support|issue=
if it also contains|journal=
:{{cite proceedings |title=Title |journal=Journal |volume=XX |issue=4 |conference=Conference}}
- Title. Conference. Journal. Vol. XX, no. 4.
- In the above example,
|title=
should not be italicized. - I agree with Editor David Eppstein except that I think that The Proceedings of the Royal Air Force Historical Society is a periodical rather than a journal. Use either; your call.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- My particular example is from Humphrey de Verd Leigh § External links. Here I've tried to format it more reasonably than it was, but it's not clear what exactly was supposed to be cited (Leigh is mentioned directly in at least two different presentations by different authors, but there might be also something else related). RAF Historical Society itself seems to call it a "journal", but at the same time says that "proceedings of each seminar, and the guest speaker’s paper read at each AGM, are published" in it. I don't know how people distinguish "periodical" and "journal", but this one is not very periodic (they had several issues in 1991, then none in 1992, then only this one in 1993, then several in 1994...). — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 22:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only (very brief) mention of Humphrey de Verd Leigh is in a single paper:
- Paris, Michael (1993). "Flying training in the RFC, 1912–1915: A failure to prepare?" (PDF). Proceedings of the Royal Air Force Historical Society (11): 25–30.
- What reason do you have for insisting on citing the whole issue rather than being more specific? —David Eppstein (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not insisting and have no reason for that, please read my explanations above. If you know better what to do, just go ahead. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I explicitly suggested what to do above: cite the single paper by Paris that mentions the subject, as a journal paper, using the formatting I used. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not insisting and have no reason for that, please read my explanations above. If you know better what to do, just go ahead. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only (very brief) mention of Humphrey de Verd Leigh is in a single paper:
- My particular example is from Humphrey de Verd Leigh § External links. Here I've tried to format it more reasonably than it was, but it's not clear what exactly was supposed to be cited (Leigh is mentioned directly in at least two different presentations by different authors, but there might be also something else related). RAF Historical Society itself seems to call it a "journal", but at the same time says that "proceedings of each seminar, and the guest speaker’s paper read at each AGM, are published" in it. I don't know how people distinguish "periodical" and "journal", but this one is not very periodic (they had several issues in 1991, then none in 1992, then only this one in 1993, then several in 1994...). — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 22:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Title format for {{Cite AV media}}
[edit]Is there a way to display the title of a work in quotes rather than italics when using {{Cite AV media}}? I can't figure out a way to change the default italic formatting. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Enhancement request: add function in CS1 translator to list supported languages
[edit]Please add a new function 'list' (or maybe, 'languages') to Module:CS1 translator that returns a list of all the supported languages. My immediate use case is about mentioning this module on a Talk page, and naming the language list, so ideal would be comma-separated, and pre-final 'and': i.e, "Arabic, Chinese, , ... , and Turkish". (That suggests other possible enhancements down the road, including: returning WP (ISO)-prefix codes, or returning one language name given an index number or a WP/ISO code, returning the name if it's supported and empty if it isn't, for use in table-building, or support-checking. I can give a specific case where this would be useful, if interested, on an instruction page for translators.) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:12, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you
[mention] this module on a Talk page
, you could link to it. The module documentation, right at the top, has a table of supported templates with their associated languages (see Module:CS1 translator § Supported templates). If this is too technical, does{{Non-English citation templates}}
answer? - Is there a demonstrable need? This sounds like 'it sure would be nice if someone created thing one in case someday, someone else, might want to do thing two.'
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, that'll do. Mathglot (talk) 19:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
For two articles in this category, I can't find the red error message:
Normally cntrl-f searching the rendered page for "archive-url" finds it. -- GreenC 23:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I edited, changed nothing, published: not in category anymore.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I did purge, needed null. Never been clear on the difference. -- GreenC 01:49, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
`Cite standard` redirect
[edit]{{Cite standard}}
is currently a redirect to {{Cite tech report}}
. I feel this is unideal, as the |type=
specified is unideal when citing standards, which are distinguished from technical reports by many bodies. Would it be a headache to retarget this redirect in a manner that only changes this parameter? Not sure if |type=Standard
or left unset is ideal, but. Remsense诉 23:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't like the auto-value assigned to
|type=
choose another:|type=Standard
or if that isn't acceptable,|type=none
.{{cite standard |title=Title}}
- Title.
{{cite standard |title=Title |type=Standard}}
- Title (Standard).
{{cite standard |title=Title |type=none}}
- Title.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 01:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Of course: my point is that since this would have to be done in each case, I would question the utility of this particular redirect. Remsense诉 01:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is no way to cite a standard and have cs1|2 autoset
|type=Standard
(or whatever). You can avoid using{{cite standard}}
and use another cs1|2 template but you will still need to manually set|type=
if you want the template to render a type. If you don't, use a cs1|2 template that doesn't autoset|type=
. Alternately, change{{cite standard}}
from a redirect to a wrapper template around your favorite cs1|2 template and preset|type=
to your preferred value. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 01:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I was considering the latter, thank you for your expertise! Remsense诉 01:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is no way to cite a standard and have cs1|2 autoset
- Of course: my point is that since this would have to be done in each case, I would question the utility of this particular redirect. Remsense诉 01:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- The
|type=
parameter is an alias for|medium=
; repurposing it as|type=standard
precludes using|medium=
. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Whitespace workaround for invisible templates redux
[edit]Sorry to persist about this, but as stated in this discussion about the issue: invisible templates such as {{Bots}}
and {{CS1 config}}
emit a newline, which is apparently an ancient bug avoided in other widely used templates like {{EngvarB}}
with a <nowiki>...</nowiki>
hack. If it's not liable to create problems, would it be possible to implement this same workaround in {tlx|Bots}} and {{CS1 config}}
for the time being? Remsense诉 00:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T369520
- And a ping to John of Reading when he returns from vacation; he seems to have come up with the hack here: [1] Rjjiii (talk) 00:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC) Edit: old discussion at VPT 00:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Rjjiii: That hack should be fine in these templates. I don't have TE rights currently, so cannot make the edits. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
See section in Module talk:Citation
[edit]User:Jon (WMF) has posted a message in Module talk:Citation#Urgent: Please fix this template for printed content Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css.. Since that page is a redirect, I provided a {{-r}} link to that comment. Nickps (talk) 19:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- The misplaced section has been moved below: #Urgent: Please fix this template for printed content Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css. —andrybak (talk) 22:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have already corrected this issue. Izno (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Urgent: Please fix this template for printed content Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css.
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Purple_arrow_down.svg/20px-Purple_arrow_down.svg.png)
Firstly, apologies for writing in English if this is not your first language (this is an automated message).
This template has been detected as one of 436 pages using styles that break the page when printed when the user is using dark mode. The fix is very straightforward - all your styles relating to dark mode must be scoped to. Since there is a high risk of this templates being copied to other wikis it is important this notice is acted on ASAP.
To fix this:
- Update `@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark` to `@media screen and (prefers-color-scheme: dark`
- Wrap any styles relating to `html.skin-theme-clientpref-night` in `@media screen`
If this message has not been acted on in 7 days, this will be fixed by an automated script. Thank you for your help fixing this important issue.
For any questions feel free to ask them at phab:T369874.
Jon (WMF) (talk) 18:22, 2 August 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the web team.
Done
- Thank you! Jon (WMF) (talk) 01:12, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Requested edit to Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration
[edit]![]() | This edit request to Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On line 1179 of Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox, I have added 'grc'
to the array script_lang_codes
, so that Ancient Greek can be supported as a script-title
language. Trappist the monk has also added 'ce'
to the same array, for Chechen, which should also be safe to add, but these are not the only changes between the sandbox and the live version of the include, so please copy over the whole array definition from line 1178 to 1183. (Note too that the array includes manual line breaks, so some items have moved onto the following line, compared with the live version; please check that no duplicate values exist in the array before saving.) Thank you! — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 21:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- No need to hurry. The
grc
text is correctly marked up:{{Citation |author=[[Herodian]] |script-title=grc:Τῆς μετὰ Μάρκον βασιλείας ἱστορία |trans-title=History of the Empire from the Death of Marcus |at=[http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/herodian_03_book3.htm#C8 III, 8, 2] |language=grc}}
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000066-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFHerodian" class="citation cs2 cs1-prop-foreign-lang-source-2">[[Herodian]], <bdi lang="grc" >Τῆς μετὰ Μάρκον βασιλείας ἱστορία</bdi> [''History of the Empire from the Death of Marcus''] (in Ancient Greek), [http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/herodian_03_book3.htm#C8 III, 8, 2]</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=grc%3A%CE%A4%E1%BF%86%CF%82+%CE%BC%CE%B5%CF%84%E1%BD%B0+%CE%9C%CE%AC%CF%81%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%BD+%CE%B2%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B9%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%AF%CE%B1%CF%82+%E1%BC%B1%CF%83%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%B1&rft.pages=III%2C+8%2C+2&rft.au=Herodian&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fwiki.riteme.site%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1" class="Z3988"></span> <span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment"><code class="cs1-code">{{[[Template:citation|citation]]}}</code>: </span><span class="cs1-visible-error citation-comment">Invalid <code class="cs1-code">|script-title=</code>: unknown language code ([[Help:CS1 errors#script_parameter|help]])</span>
- It is my intention to update all of the cs1|2 suite modules within the next couple of weeks.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough; I'm certainly in no hurry and had seen that the markup was working. I mainly just wanted to suppress the error message once I spotted it. If you're already on it, then I'll leave you to it. Thank you! 🙂 — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 22:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
{Cite journal} pages styling
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There is no 'p.', 'pg.', 'p ' or something of the sort indicating the numbers supplied in the page=
or pages=
parameters are pages for {cite journal}. Please change the displayed text from '<supplied-numbers>' to 'p. <supplied numbers>'.
Observe the example below, where I have only included page=400-500
. It only displays '400-500', but it should display 'p. 400-500'
: 400-500. {{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help); Missing or empty |title=
(help)
(Perhaps I am wrong about this, and there is a special academic standard for citing journal page numbers I am unaware of?) Tule-hog (talk) 19:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- It seems fine to me as it is. What apart from a page span could be meant by an ndash-separated pair of increasing numbers following a colon following the volume and issue? Why not use {{cite periodical}} if you're unhappy with the display formatting of {{cite journal}}? Folly Mox (talk) 20:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, note this also applies to
page=
which does not provide an n-dash. I thought the following was a little confusing along side a year: - . 2000: 1900.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help); Missing or empty|title=
(help) - I thought it was incorrect, not bad. If others disagree, then let it stay! Tule-hog (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Since we purport to be a publication for a generalist audience, I would think that we should format our citations for a generalist audience as well. Yes, that formatting is used in specialist publications, but we are not a specialist publication. For that reason, I continue to advocate that we should drop the overly truncated formatting for the volume/issue/page triplet on journals in favor of adding "vol.", "no." and "p." or "pp.". In short, it should be the way
{{cite magazine}}
does it without separating the vol./no. from the p. or pp. Imzadi 1979 → 20:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)- I feel like the "vol." and "no." add undesirable cruft that is more difficult to identify on vgrep than the bolded volume number of {{cite journal}}. Just because we're not a specialist publication doesn't mean we shouldn't support multiple citation formats. Also, I like that the formatting between {{cite journal}} and {{cite magazine}} differs, which lets me see at a glance how reputable and peer-reviewed a source is / purports to be.If there are confusion points in our citations to expunge for immediate understanding by any reader, I'd start with the lowest hanging fruit of Bibcodes and s2cids, which seldom if ever add any useful information even on clickthrough, and are entirely unfamiliar to almost every reader. Folly Mox (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- People get used to this formatting after seeing it a few times, and the concision is helpful. Making it more explicit helps someone the first time, but only at the expense of significantly reducing information density of reference sections, which isn't worth it IMO. –jacobolus (t) 02:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, note this also applies to
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the
{{Edit semi-protected}}
template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:41, 4 August 2024 (UTC)- Is there a template to indicate the intent to use the {edit semi-protected} in future (i.e. 'request proposal', 'needs consensus', or something)? Tule-hog (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- No. You just discuss until there is consensus, and then you can remove
|answered=yes
from the template in this section to reactivate the request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- No. You just discuss until there is consensus, and then you can remove
- Is there a template to indicate the intent to use the {edit semi-protected} in future (i.e. 'request proposal', 'needs consensus', or something)? Tule-hog (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
What would it take for...
[edit]Each parameter to be wrapped in a <span class="cs1parameter"></span>?
For example, if we had
- Linden, David van der (23 December 2015). "Coping with crisis. Career strategies of Antwerp painters after 1585". De Zeventiende Eeuw. Cultuur in de Nederlanden in Interdisciplinair Perspectief. 31 (1): 18. doi:10.18352/dze.10126.
That was built something like
- <span class=cs1last>Linden</span>, <span class=cs1first>David van der</span> (<span class=cs1date>23 December 2015</span>). "<span class=cs1title>Coping with crisis. Career strategies of Antwerp painters after 1585</span>". <span class=cs1journal>''De Zeventiende Eeuw. Cultuur in de Nederlanden in interdisciplinair perspectief''</span>. <span class=cs1volume>'''31'''</span> (<span class=cs1issue>1</span>): <span class=cs1pages>18</span>. <span class=cs1doi>{{doi|10.18352/dze.10126}}</span>.
Then people could customize how citation look. Don't want ISSNs to display? hide them with your own CSS tweaks. Don't like last/first order? Rejiggle it to First/Last with CSS. Want "vol./no./p. or pp." to show or not show? CSS tweaks again.
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:47, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Adding something like that shouldn't be that hard, but the question is what are the costs for doing so. Would the additional characters cause loading time to increase on large articles? Gonnym (talk) 15:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- This would significantly increase the output of a page using CS1 and likely decrease the number of pages that fit under WP:PEIS. Right now our limit seems to be around 600 references on any given day. Playing with it in a text editor with the full output of the initial example (including the coins), we're looking at an increase from 1090 to 1340 bytes, which is about 23%. On a page with 600 references of a similar size, that take the maximum down to about 480. And for pages where more authors are typical in citations, the ratio would grow pretty significantly (and you wouldn't be able to format the multi-author list without Javascript). I think it'd be neat to do something like this, but I don't think it's in the cards without sacrificing coins, which at least has what I think is a more meaningful benefit to people other than the elite. Izno (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Would we need COinS if we had this? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Various software consume COinS natively today (notably Zotero). They would need to build adapters of some sort to consume our references marked up like this. Maybe fine for Google who I'm sure uses the data and can adapt at whatever velocity to a change in our output, not so good for the open source and general user community. Izno (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Would we need COinS if we had this? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- This would significantly increase the output of a page using CS1 and likely decrease the number of pages that fit under WP:PEIS. Right now our limit seems to be around 600 references on any given day. Playing with it in a text editor with the full output of the initial example (including the coins), we're looking at an increase from 1090 to 1340 bytes, which is about 23%. On a page with 600 references of a similar size, that take the maximum down to about 480. And for pages where more authors are typical in citations, the ratio would grow pretty significantly (and you wouldn't be able to format the multi-author list without Javascript). I think it'd be neat to do something like this, but I don't think it's in the cards without sacrificing coins, which at least has what I think is a more meaningful benefit to people other than the elite. Izno (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Bad DOI link
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Purple_arrow_down.svg/20px-Purple_arrow_down.svg.png)
Not related to the bot, but people stalking this page could perhaps help me. What should be done with this reference on Bartholomeus de Momper the Elder:
Linden, David van der (2015). "Coping with crisis. Career strategies of Antwerp painters after 1585". De Zeventiende Eeuw. Cultuur in de Nederlanden in Interdisciplinair Perspectief. 31: 18. doi:10.18352/dze.10126.
The link the doi points to is "for sale" and not working. Can mark the doi link as not working/usurped? Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 02:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) In Special:Diff/1238717754 I marked the DOI inactive using
|doi-broken-date=
, and provided an alternative URL whilst the journal sorts out its DNS registration. Future inquiries of this sort are best handled at Help talk:Citation Style 1, FYI. Kindly, Folly Mox (talk) 09:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)- Josve05a, fixing ping. Folly Mox (talk) 09:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- The DOI is not broken though. The landing page is usurped. That's a different issue. This should be discussed at Help:CS1. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- So, anyone got a solution how to mark a doi-link as usurped? Is that an acceptable input in
|doi-broken-date=
somehow? Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 09:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC) - It's true that the DOI is not inactive in the usual sense which leads to a "DOI not found" result at doi.org, but it's not not broken. This is such an unusual situation that I don't think we need a
|doi-status=usurped
or anything.I liked my original solution, but it's true I don't know what bots do with the inactive DOI maintenance categories. Headbomb's removal of the|doi-broken-date=
is worse, since it leaves the broken link in the reference, but rather than reverting I've commented out the DOI for now. I suppose it could be altered to a plaintext field or postscript, so that it's visible to the reader but not linked to the usurped domain. Folly Mox (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- So, anyone got a solution how to mark a doi-link as usurped? Is that an acceptable input in
- How is this case really any different from the last bullet point at Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive (transcluded from
{{broken doi explanation}}
)? That item reproduced here for convenience:- The DOI resolves to a dead link. These are hard to report, since the doi.org thinks the DOI works and sometimes the journal no longer exists.
- In this particular case, a squatter is sitting on https://www.de-zeventiende-eeuw.nl/. For our purposes, that link is just as dead as a doi that links to a 404 page. I suspect that the squatter does not return 404 so it may be necessary to tweak Citation bot to look for
<meta name="description" content="This domain may be for sale!" />
or some such so that it doesn't inadvertently remove this sort of source from Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive. - If one is to believe this search, there are eleven articles that have
10.18352/dze...
dois. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Floating a long-term big idea
[edit]My user story is that newer editors using the Visual Editor's built in citation functionality running on Citoid often create garbage citations which have bad values and end up sorted into maintenance categories for others to fix.
There doesn't seem to be any will / urgency to implement any kind of error checking into Citoid: the goal seems to be to integrate it into more Wikimedia projects without addressing most of its problems.
My theory is that we may be able to get inexperienced editors to get in the habit of double checking the automatically generated citations if we show them the errors they're causing as soon as the citation is generated.
Module:CS1 is the thing that can do this best, and already handles it for existing citations.
I'm wondering whether there is or could be a hook somewhere in the module that citations could be passed to whenever they're created in the Visual Editor environment, to give editors instant feedback on the outcome of the Citoid library call.
I'm aware we'd need Foundation cooperation to integrate a CS1 error / maint check, either within Visual Editor or as part of the Edit Check feature once that is deployed. I'm just wondering how possible / difficult this side of it would be. Folly Mox (talk) 22:03, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- One possibility would be to use an edit filter that catches new CS1 errors, warns against them, and requires editors to confirm before saving. I don't think that would require any Wikimedia cooperation. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- VE's citation generator could theoretically detect the presence of errors and maintenance items: since it's already doing the rendering, it can just take what's inside cs1-maint/cs1-visible-error/cs1-hidden-error. Izno (talk) 21:30, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
module suite update 17–18 August 2024
[edit]I propose to update cs1|2 module suite over the weekend 17–18 August 2024. Here are the changes:
- allow
|agency=
in{{cite magazine}}
; discussion - maintenance category when value assigned to
|year=
is more precise than a year; discussion
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration:
- fix 'email' generic name pattern; discussion
- fix undeclared variable 'uncategorized_namespaces_t'; no discussion; this edit
- add free DOI registrants: 4230 (LIPIcs) and 12942 (Living Reviews)
- maintenance category when value assigned to
|year=
is more precise than a year; - support free-to-read DOI on certain
10.registrant/incipit...
; initial support for MNRAS, MNRAS Letters, Geophysical Journal International, RAS Techniques and Instruments; discussion - test for 'bureau', 'company', 'correspondent', 'desk', 'group', 'limited', 'newsroom' generic names; discussion
- update WorldCat URL prefixes; discussion
- remove support for
|authors=
; limit|people=
to{{cite av media}}
,{{cite episode}}
, and{{cite serial}}
; discussion
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation
- maintenance category when value assigned to
|year=
is more precise than a year;
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers
- support free-to-read DOI on certain
10.registrant/incipit...
; initial support for MNRAS, MNRAS Letters, Geophysical Journal International, RAS Techniques and Instruments;
—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Also:
- support free-to-read DOI on certain
10.registrant/incipit...
; additional support for Access Microbiology, Microbiology, Journal of General Microbiology, Microbial Genomics [2] - support free-to-read DOI on certain
10.registrant/incipit...
; additional support for Heliyon [3] - support free-to-read DOI on certain
10.registrant/incipit...
; additional support for Journal of the Endocrine Society, JCEM Case Reports [4]
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:33, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
What if the author is a organization such as AJC Sports?
[edit]What if the author is a organization such as AJC Sports? Abhiramakella (talk) 23:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Then use only the
|publisher=
parameter, and do not specify an individual author. Remsense诉 00:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC) - AJC == The Atlanta Journal-Constitution? Then
{{cite news}}
and|newspaper=AJC Sports
or|work=AJC Sports
. Omit|author=
. See Help:Citation Style 1 § Authors. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 00:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Allowing Visual Editor/Citoid Citation tool to use more than one name format
[edit]Editors who use the manual citation generator in the Visual Editor see an interface in which they are unable to enter any author names that do not conform to the Lastname-Firstname naming system. This is not an issue for manual sourcing or for the Wikitext citation generator, which both allow the use of the |author
alias. My understanding is that the VE tool does not allow for the use of aliases, and some devs have indicated that changing the template data here is a preferred solution to this [5][6]. VE is already enabled for new users and recommended via pop-up to anonymous editors, so is there a way to adjust the WP:TEMPLATEDATA so that the author field can be used by VE? CMD (talk) 10:44, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- The quirks of VE and TemplateData really are outside of the cs1|2 bailiwick. If what you say is true (I will not use ve so don't really know) then that suggests yet another fault in ve: an inability to recognize and utilize parameter aliases. If that is the case, perhaps phabricator should be your next stop.
- Have you tried adding
|authorn=
as separate parameters to the TemplateData? You should choose different names like Whole author name n. If that works, you should probably update the descriptions to note that only one of|lastn=
or|authorn=
is allowed – that order for Last name n; flipped for Whole author name n. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- The place to make this change is going to be the Template:Cite web/doc type pages, because these contain the WP:TEMPLATEDATA that is being proposed to be changed here. Template talk:Cite redirects here, which is why I suggested CMD make a post here to verify consensus for this. Phab probably wouldn't be the best place for this since this is an enwiki issue, not a wiki agnostic issue.
- To be clear about what we're talking about here, the proposal is to add Author 1, Author 2, etc. to the left side of this screenshot.
- This could have implications. For example, the number of folks using last= and first= may go down and the number of folks using author= may go up. If there is someone that goes around changing author= to last= and first= because last= and first= are considered a better practice, for example, then having a little discussion before actioning this may be helpful. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:44, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- When I suggested WP:PHAB, it is because TemplateData already knows about aliases. This is a snippet from Template:Cite web/doc § TemplateData (the first entry in the rendered table;
paramOrder
putslast
at the top of the table):"last": { "label": "Last name", "description": "The surname of the author; don't wikilink, use 'author-link'; can suffix with a numeral to add additional authors", "aliases": [ "last1", "author", "author1", "author1-last", "author-last", "surname1", "author-last1", "subject1", "surname", "author-last", "subject" ], "type": "line", "suggested": true },
- Clearly, TemplateData already knows about those
aliases
. There should be no need for editors to add individual entries to the TemplateData for some or all of those aliases. Because all of those aliases are known, ve should be able to present them all to the editor; perhaps as a radio button sublist underLast name
withlast
selected as the default. As the editor, if you want|author=
from the alias list, tick that radio button and untick the associated 'First name' checkbox. The solution to the ve-can't/won't-use-already-existing-alias-list problem lies with MediaWiki, not with editors adding yet more parameters to TemplateData. And it certainly is not a cs1|2 template problem because cs1|2 templates are not the only templates that use parameters that have aliases. Not going to hold my breath waiting for a MediaWiki solution. In the meantime, the alias list is pointless and editors must add individual TemplateData entries for all aliases. How cumbersome; you can see why I abhor ve. - It has been said here that
|first=
/|last=
is the preferred name-list style but that does not work for all names (most notably Asian names where the separating comma in the rendering is problematic). There is a clumsy workaround for that but a good solution has yet to be discovered. If the goal of ve is to use only preferred parameter names, support for aliases should be withdrawn. Not going to hold my breath for that either. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe it would help for Chipmunkdavis to provide a concrete example of how they are "unable" to enter an author name. If you want to cite a work by Sting (musician), what is preventing you from putting "Sting" in
|last=
using VE? Our documentation says "For corporate authors or authors for whom only one name is listed by the source, use last or one of its aliases". – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2024 (UTC)- Nothing is preventing me, I'm an experienced editor who knows the suggested course of action to ignore the instruction saying "The surname of the author" and just put in what I want, and also knows if I do that to go into the wikitext to fix the mislabeling of "Sting" as a last name. Relatedly the documentation should be changed, "whom only one name" is a small subset of affected names. CMD (talk) 17:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe I misunderstood the meaning of the word "unable" in the OP:
Editors who use the manual citation generator in the Visual Editor see an interface in which they are unable to enter any author names that do not conform to the Lastname-Firstname naming system.
The documentation is not protected. That includes the TemplateData portion of the documentation, which is what provides guidance to editors who use VE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC)- You seem to have, as you copied through the fuller text however editors are unable to do so by following the instructions in the interface' your suggested solution is to ignore the interface. The documentation is not provided as guidance to editors that use VE, editors are provided only with the text that Novem has provided a screenshot of above. CMD (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT? If editors can't or won't read template documentation, I don't know what to tell them. If VE needs its own documentation, it is up to people who care about VE to make it work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- That is what I am doing, I am here to fix it. That is why I have opened this discussion, it is intended to find ways to fix it. CMD (talk) 03:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- We came here to check consensus and I do not see sny objections, so let's just go ahead and edit the TemplateData and call it a day. We should make a list of every template that starts with cite, then edit the corresponding /doc pages (this is where TemplateData is stored) and add something like author, author2, ..., author10. CMD, want to take a stab at it? –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
|author=
already exists in the TemplateData. I think what you want to do is click "Edit template data" and then change the description for that parameter, currentlyThe surname of the author; don't wikilink, use 'author-link'; can suffix with a numeral to add additional authors
, to something that matches the actual documentation, possibly "The surname of the author, name of the corporate author, or author for whom only one name is listed by the source; do not wikilink ...". – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2024 (UTC)- Ummm, are you sure? If you look at the JSON formatted TemplateData for
{{cite web}}
, you will find only two instances of"author"
(with quotes): the|last=
definition as an alias (see my post above) and at"maps":
→"citoid":
→"author":
(as I understand it this latter applies only to automated, citoid-created, templates). - If someone adds
|authorn=
as a separate parameter, I fear that we will see an increase in the number of articles that populate Category:CS1 errors: redundant parameter because OMG!-there's-an-empty-box-in-the-form;-I-must-fill-it. This is why I suggested radio buttons for aliases; something that MediaWiki would needs implement. Not that it will do much good, but anyone adding|authorn=
as a separate parameter to TemplateData should carefully consider the description wording to emphasize the only-one-of-authorn-or-lastn-is-allowed property of name-list parameters. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- My impression from the OP's description of what they see when using VE is that changing the "Description" for
|last=
in the Template Data will resolve their issue. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2024 (UTC)- Asking new editors to translate "last" as not meaning "last" is not an optimal solution, as it suggests to new editors that the instructions/labels we have are poorly written, and it will populate templates with a |last field that does not contain a last name. The OMG-empty-box-fill is a complicating issue as well. I wonder how often both fields are filled with the wikitext citation tool. CMD (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Are new editors likely to be using the
manual citation generator in the Visual Editor
? From your OP, I understood you to be describing experienced editors. Hard (impossible) to knowhow often both fields are filled with the wikitext citation tool
. Category:CS1 errors: redundant parameter is mostly empty which suggests that there is a cohort of gnome editors who keep it swept clean. I guess there is more of a sense of accomplishment when emptying nearly-empty error and maint cats – I wish they would turn their attention to some of the very-not-so-empty cats... - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Are new editors likely to be using the
- Mayhaps we're both confused. OP's first sentence is:
Editors who use the manual citation generator in the Visual Editor see an interface in which they are unable to enter any author names that do not conform to the Lastname-Firstname naming system.
To me, that says that using ve to manually create citations does not allow editors to create citations that use|authorn=
. Instead, editors must use|lastn=
and, as a separate operationgo into the wikitext to fix the mislabeling of "Sting" as a last name
. From all of that, I understand OP to be saying that they want to have authorn appear in the list of available parameters when manually creating citations using ve. The 'MediaWiki approved™' solution is to add authorn definitions to TemplateData. I think that this is a copout and that MediaWiki should allow editors to select from the list of aliases that TemplateData already knows about. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- The general issue is present for all editors who use the VE citation tool, even experienced editors would be putting in incorrect markup if they used |last for a different name. However, the issue is obviously far more impactful for new editors, and VE is from various accounts much easier for them to use than wikitext markup. You seem to understand me accurately; I also felt the unwillingness to deal with this in VE itself was somewhat a copout and stated as much on the pump discussion. Nonetheless, I think it's an issue worth solving, and if there's another way to move it along (perhaps even just in the interim) it seems worth implementing. CMD (talk) 17:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Asking new editors to translate "last" as not meaning "last" is not an optimal solution, as it suggests to new editors that the instructions/labels we have are poorly written, and it will populate templates with a |last field that does not contain a last name. The OMG-empty-box-fill is a complicating issue as well. I wonder how often both fields are filled with the wikitext citation tool. CMD (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- My impression from the OP's description of what they see when using VE is that changing the "Description" for
- Ummm, are you sure? If you look at the JSON formatted TemplateData for
- We came here to check consensus and I do not see sny objections, so let's just go ahead and edit the TemplateData and call it a day. We should make a list of every template that starts with cite, then edit the corresponding /doc pages (this is where TemplateData is stored) and add something like author, author2, ..., author10. CMD, want to take a stab at it? –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- That is what I am doing, I am here to fix it. That is why I have opened this discussion, it is intended to find ways to fix it. CMD (talk) 03:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT? If editors can't or won't read template documentation, I don't know what to tell them. If VE needs its own documentation, it is up to people who care about VE to make it work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- You seem to have, as you copied through the fuller text however editors are unable to do so by following the instructions in the interface' your suggested solution is to ignore the interface. The documentation is not provided as guidance to editors that use VE, editors are provided only with the text that Novem has provided a screenshot of above. CMD (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe I misunderstood the meaning of the word "unable" in the OP:
- Nothing is preventing me, I'm an experienced editor who knows the suggested course of action to ignore the instruction saying "The surname of the author" and just put in what I want, and also knows if I do that to go into the wikitext to fix the mislabeling of "Sting" as a last name. Relatedly the documentation should be changed, "whom only one name" is a small subset of affected names. CMD (talk) 17:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe it would help for Chipmunkdavis to provide a concrete example of how they are "unable" to enter an author name. If you want to cite a work by Sting (musician), what is preventing you from putting "Sting" in
- When I suggested WP:PHAB, it is because TemplateData already knows about aliases. This is a snippet from Template:Cite web/doc § TemplateData (the first entry in the rendered table;
If an italicized title ends in a question mark, shouldn't the following punctuation be suppressed?
[edit]For example:
- Bryant, John; Sangwin, Chris (2008). How Round Is Your Circle?. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-14992-9.
Or likewise with an exclamation mark:
- Eastman, P. D. (1961). Go, Dog. Go!. Random House. ISBN 0-394-80020-6.
It seems like the output should not put a period or comma immediately after another punctuation symbol.
Edit: the relevant manual of style section is MOS:CONSECUTIVE. –jacobolus (t) 06:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)