Jump to content

Help talk:Citation Style 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    cite thesis first=aaa bbb, Jr.

    [edit]

    |first=James Thomas, Jr.

    causes

    Script warning: One or more {{cite thesis}} templates have maintenance messages; messages may be hidden (help).

    69.181.17.113 (talk) 15:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Of course. See MOS:JR.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 15:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    [edit]

    When you're citing a book with the cite book template, you can use title-link= to link to the book's wikipedia article, but since on cite encyclopedia the title parameter is for the chapter and not the work title, it doesn't let you link to the encyclopedia. Is there any fix for this, because I find it very annoying. Generally this template just seems to be a slightly worse version of {{Cite book}}, which fulfills its purpose the same way. Maybe they should be merged? PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    PARAKANYAA, use |entry= and |title= instead of |title= and |encyclopaedia=. This will alias correctly and allow for usage of |title-link=. Your assessment of a slightly worse version of {{Cite book}} is shared. Folly Mox (talk) 10:41, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See also Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 92 § cite encyclopedia (January 2024). Folly Mox (talk) 12:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    strange capitalization

    [edit]

    Why was {{cite web}} unilaterally capitalized in the documentation just recently? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Editor MtBotany made that edit. Best to ask them. So far as I know, there was no discussion here mandating that change.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 18:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd planned to ask at template talk:cite web (per my original wording), but figured here was the only place to ask, given the redirection. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fourthords I thought it was the correct style based on what I have seen used in other templates. If I am wrong I apologize and feel free to correct what I did. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 18:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no idea whether you were incorrect to do so; that's why I asked. What I can say is that it doesn't match the documentations at {{cite book}}, {{cite magazine}}, {{cite news}}, and {{cite journal}}. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're right about that. I assumed that all templates used the same style of first letter capitalized to match with the way it is in the name of the page. I had also seen it capitalized that way in the documentation of Template:Reflist. It does work either way, but I was trying for consistency and made things more confused rather than less. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    SSRN update request

    [edit]

    Rio do Rasto Formation has this working SSRN link but it's being flagged as incorrect. Category:CS1 errors: SSRN said to mention it here as it's above the 4900000 range. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:16, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    IslamPidia might be deleted or moved by the time this issues is resolved, but it includes a working SSRN numbered 5000986. The SSRN error help page currently says numbers up to 5000000 are valid. Maybe we should bump it up to 5100000? Snowman304|talk 19:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    PMC limit update

    [edit]

    PMC 11508991 - 11508991 - confirmed by pmid & doi @ Anderus maculifrons - ref 3 and also others new 6245 & 6159 checked from errors: PMC Dave-okanagan (talk) 07:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Work vs. Publisher

    [edit]

    This template includes both "work" and "publisher" - what then is the semantic difference between the two? Also, in what circumstance might both be utilised?
    Enquire (talk) 21:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    See Help:Citation Style 1 § Work and publisher.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 21:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikibooks for CS1|2

    [edit]

    Looking at the above discussion about Help:Citation Style 1 § documentation for work and publisher, it's surprising no one has ever created a Wikibook for CS1|2. It would be genuinely useful to a lot of people. And could be better than current documentation, there are no space or formatting constraints. It's like the difference between templates written in wikitext vs. Lua -- one can be made to work for short and easy tasks, the other is the proper way to scale larger jobs. The CS1|2 docs are now large and complex. Here is a Wikibook on LaTeX, and other computer books. -- GreenC 04:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    URLs, for volume and issue and page

    [edit]

    If a magazine/journal article doesn't have a proper URL, but proper URLs exist for a page that is being cited, or an entire issue that was scanned, or to a compendium; such as a hardbound yearly volume that was scanned; then shouldn't there be |volume-url= , |issue-url= , |page-url= / |at-url= available? Bluelinking the article title would seem off, considering that entering a DOI doesn't bluelink the article title. And subbing in an entire year/volume url under the article title instead of the volume id doesn't give a reader the article they think they've been pointed to. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 11:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    |at= and |page= will accept external links as values without throwing an error like the rest of the template parameters. You might have to do some manual formatting (especially if you're using |at= to link a volume, and have to leave out the |volume= parameter to offset— a form of parameter abuse someone here is likely to inveigh against).
    Also, entering a DOI in combination with |doi-access=free will bluelink the title, for {{cite journal}} only. Folly Mox (talk) 11:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Cite what you see. If you are reading a book that is a yearly bound volume of magazine releases, then make the reference to that book rather than the magazine. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What I can read and what I can provide a URL to can be different. In one case, I can access a volume URL, but I can access a physical copy, which is just an issue. It would be nice if page/at had URL params. I'll give the URL encoded in page/at params a go, to link to the particular point where a piece referenced data occurs -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While |page-url= would be nice, |page=[url#page=pdfpage pageno] works well.-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 13:28, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Two dots at the end?

    [edit]

    I noticed that this template appears to add two dots at the end of the citation for no obvious reason. See External links on this page for an example (there is only one external link). Can somebody figure out why this happens and fix it?

    SkyLined (talk) 09:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    While I confirm that the citation appears in the link above with double dots, the exact same template, copied, doesn't produce double dots (for me, anyway!) here:
    (Also the link as generated by Citer doesn't produce double dots in the original context.)
    Pol098 (talk) 12:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The extra dot was placed after one of the categories for the article. Since categorisation doesn't render in place, but rather at the page foot, it made it appear as if the dot was produced by the citation template. I removed it. Folly Mox (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for spotting and fixing that!
    It currently renders as The 'Basic' HTTP Authentication Scheme. Internet Engineering Task Force. September 2015. doi:10.17487/RFC7617. RFC 7617. which has more than a few dots and repeats the RFC number. That looks weird to me - is that how it is supposed to look?
    SkyLined (talk) 02:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    {{cite IETF}} is not a cs1|2 template. It is a wrapper around {{citation}}. If you believe that that {{cite IETF}} should render differently, you must discuss that at the template's talk page.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 14:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    length or running time parameters

    [edit]

    This page was given as Talk for Cite AV Media template.

    Nowhere do I find any parameter for the size of the media as in "pages=" for books; the "time=" parameter is described as a location in the work, like "page=" or "at=".71.230.16.111 (talk) 05:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @71.230.16.111: we typically don't list the size of a work in that way in a citation. |pages= is for a page range of a location within a book or other work, not the total size. That parameter is used to prefix the plural "pp." in front of a group of pages instead of the singular "p.", and it's not for the total pages in a book. This might be the source of confusion for you. Imzadi 1979  05:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I use |type=Video (23'34"). Unlike, say, a book, AV media are sequential, not random, access, so the length is more relevant to the reader. If this suggestion is generally liked, it could be added to the documentation of {{Cite AV media}}. Documentation for |type= at present includes "Alias: |medium=. Use one of the following as applicable: Motion picture, Television production, Videotape, DVD, Blu-ray, Trailer, CD, Radio broadcast, Podcast". Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 13:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Documentation unnecessarily verbose (author1, author2, ... author9)

    [edit]

    The documentation for the citation templates in unnecessarily verbose, with entries tabulated like author3, last3, author3-link, for numerical values up to 9, and similarly for other parameters. After the entries for the 2nd author (etc.), I suggest simply and similar values for further authors, e.g. author3, etc. , omitting entries 3-9. This also has the merit of being more general; the existing table goes up to 9, without mention of listing further authors, e.g., author15. I suppose there is a limit to the number of authors (etc.) supported; this could be mentioned (some physics papers have around 1,000 authors, though I don't suggest including them all). This is fairly obvious; maybe it has been suggested, and rejected? Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 14:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    There is no practical limit to n in |authorn= (for the real limit see mw:Extension:Scribunto/Lua reference manual § number).
    If you are talking about that abomination that is TemplateData, this is the wrong venue. There is no support in TemplateData to 'short-hand' enumerated parameter names.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 15:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks; indeed TemplateData. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 15:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    URL for cite document

    [edit]

    {{cite document}} under its COinS says url is supported. But at Kaufman, Texas I'm getting "Unknown parameter |url= ignored" How do I specify a URL for {{cite document}}? Jay 💬 14:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This table of metadata is displayed in the documentation of all Citation Style 1 templates. Not all of these parameters are supported by every CS1 template. {{Cite document}} is specifically for offline documents; why not use {{cite web}}? Mackensen (talk) 15:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)
    From the first line of text in the {{cite document}} template's documentation:
    This ... template is used to create citations for short, stand-alone, off-line documents. (emphasis added)
    The COinS documentation at Template:Cite document § COinS has this:
    Note: This table of metadata is displayed in the documentation of all Citation Style 1 templates. Not all of these parameters are supported by every CS1 template.
    Use an appropriate template.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 15:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed. Folly Mox (talk) 15:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For some documents {{Cite report}}, which takes a URL, is appropriate. Pol098 (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, but since it was a PDF, I wanted to use a citation that is closest to document. And that PDF is not a report. Jay 💬 07:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    MOS:RANGE violation

    [edit]

    MOS:RANGE states: "The en dash in a range is always unspaced, except when either or both elements of the range include at least one space, hyphen, or en dash; in such cases, {{snd}} between them will provide the proper formatting" and it gives the example "pages 5-7 – 5-9". However, the citation templates do not obey this, instead stripping out the spaces from parameters like |pages=12-1 – 12-24

    Example:

    • {{citation|title=Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook: General Concepts and Techniques|editor1-first=Mikhail J.|editor1-last=Atallah|editor2-first=Marina|editor2-last=Blanton|contribution=Chapter 12: Randomized Algorithms|first1=Rajeev|last1=Motwani|author1-link=Rajeev Motwani|first2=Prabhakar|last2=Raghavan|author2-link=Prabhakar Raghavan|edition=2nd|publisher=CRC Press|year=2010|pages=12-1 – 12-24}}
    • Motwani, Rajeev; Raghavan, Prabhakar (2010), "Chapter 12: Randomized Algorithms", in Atallah, Mikhail J.; Blanton, Marina (eds.), Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook: General Concepts and Techniques (2nd ed.), CRC Press, pp. 12-1–12-24
    • SANDBOX: Motwani, Rajeev; Raghavan, Prabhakar (2010), "Chapter 12: Randomized Algorithms", in Atallah, Mikhail J.; Blanton, Marina (eds.), Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook: General Concepts and Techniques (2nd ed.), CRC Press, pp. 12-1–12-24

    Using the MOS recommendation of {{snd}} is worse, producing "12-1 –&#32, 12–24". Can this be fixed, please? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:22, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Use of ((…)) will fix that: title, pp. 12-1 – 12-24. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no need for hacks. If this should be fixed, the module can handle it without that. Gonnym (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree this should be fixed but am not sure how to fix it. Maybe this is something Trappist the monk or Folly Mox can help with? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:53, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies for any confusion: I'm fairly well versed in the behaviour of Module:CS1 and its dependent templates, but I'm almost entirely unfamiliar with the codebase. I've read through parts of it, but Trappist is by far the primary maintainer. Folly Mox (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    clean up usurped / unfit / deviated

    [edit]

    For probably more than a decade, I've been fixing {{cite}} templates with |url-status=usurped or |url-status=unfit, changing those to |url-status=dead. In one place, Template:Cite web/doc offers usurped and unfit as valid values for this parameter and in two other places it additionally offers deviated, which I didn't know about until now, and that value actually works. Template:Cite news/doc has those two other places, but doesn't have the place offering usurped and unfit without also offering deviated. Recommendations: First, all cite template documentation pages be updated to say that usurped and unfit are not supported and to use deviated instead. Second, cite template documentation pages should—for parameters that are identical in name, range of values, and display—explain the parameters using identical language. —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    What do you mean when you say: usurped and unfit are not supported? Give us an example of that shows how those parameter values not supported. Every cs1|2 template that supports |archive-url= (all but the preprint templates – {{cite arxiv}}, {{cite biorxiv}}, {{cite citeseerx}}, {{cite medrxiv}}, and {{cite ssrn}} – and {{cite document}}) support usurped and unfit for |url-status=.
    Most of the cs1|2 documentation comes from Template:Citation Style documentation which is shared amongst the all of the cs1|2 templates. That is the real documentation. If you are talking about that abomination that is TemplateData, that is not the template documentation. Please specify where you think that the documentation is falling short. If you know how the documentation can be improved, please improve it. The documentation is not protected.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 23:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]