Jump to content

Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Help talk:Citation Style 1
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 09:26, 15 November 2014 (Archiving 2 discussions from Help talk:Citation Style 1. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10

Cite original title or second title for the continuation of a newspaper story

Sometimes a story from one page of a newspaper (e.g. on page 1 "Easter Bunny Goes Berzerk") is continued on another page under a different title (e.g. on page 2, "Children run in terror; Chocolate eggs spilled everywhere - continued from p. 1"). If the material I want to use is on page 2, do I still cite only the original title? Should I use |page=2 or |pages=1-2 if I am only using material on page 2? In using the GNews archives, I am also wondering if I should use |url= to link to the original title on page 1 where the article starts or the second title on page 2 where the material I want to use is located. Thanks again! - Location (talk) 16:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I suppose that you could do this:
{{cite news |title=Easter Bunny Goes Berzerk |chapter=Children run in terror; Chocolate eggs spilled everywhere |newspaper=[[Easter Bunny, Kill! Kill!]] |last=Lapin |first=Jacques |page=2 |url=//example.com}}
which gives:
Lapin, Jacques. "Easter Bunny Goes Berzerk". Easter Bunny, Kill! Kill!. p. 2. {{cite news}}: |chapter= ignored (help)
That sort of works but just isn't quite right. You might concatenate the two titles:
|title=Easter Bunny Goes Berzerk: Children run in terror; Chocolate eggs spilled everywhere
and then refer to |page=2
Or:
|title=Children run in terror; Chocolate eggs spilled everywhere |page=2 |url=<page 2 url>
Unless there is a need elsewise, link to page 2 if that is where the pertinent information is located.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
|title=Easter Bunny Goes Berzerk|at=p. 2, "Children run in terror; Chocolate eggs spilled everywhere" --Redrose64 (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
IMHO, if possible, use a URL that links to the complete article, not a URL that links only to page 2. The reader may get a better understanding of the information on page 2 iif they have the context of the entire article. GoingBatty (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again to all! - Location (talk) 18:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Rendering problem with right-to-left language and trans-title

Trappist the monk and others who might know the details of the Lua code: please see the following thread at VPT: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Citations with title parameter in rtl language.2C beginning with numbers: Display issue and workaround – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

That discussion now in archive 129.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Where is the deprecated parameter in this article?

Where is the deprecated citation parameter in Michael Sells? I have done a null edit and a purge, and it shows the deprecated parameter category, but I do not see any error messages or deprecated parameters.

The category appears to have been added with this recent edit.

The article also sorts at the very top of the error category, before the articles that start with numbers, for some reason. I don't know if that is relevant.

I am also seeing this same situation with Urban College of Boston, Wiktor Eckhaus, and University of Natal. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: All four were using |access-date= instead of |accessdate=. I've been fixing these for about four years now; there is a citation tool that still insists on using the hyphen even though it's been deprecated for years. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
|access-date= is a legitimate parameter. But {{citation}} is different. {{citation}} is a hybrid of old Wiki markup and new module. The Wiki markup portion still has a call to {{citation/patent}}. As such it also includes the code that tests for the old list of deprecated parameters.
I don't think that it is necessary to keep the list – |accessdaymonth=, |accessmonthday=, |accessday=, |accessmonth=, |accessyear=, |day=, |access-date=, |dateformat=. There is some small possibility that some of these are still in use out there but none are supported by patent citations so will be silently ignored until patent citations can be brought into Module:Citation/CS1. Shall I remove this code?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:52, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, these four pages were listed at the top because the wiki markup categorization uses sort keys. The module doesn't.
[[Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters|{{NAMESPACE}} {{PAGENAME}}]]
—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, please either remove that code (preferred), or remove the portion of the code that categorizes the article in the error category, or add code that emits an error message that makes it possible to track down the error. Thanks.
Redrose64, the addition of |access-date= as a valid parameter is a recent change, after an RFC that standardized all multi-word parameters with aliases that contain hyphens in addition to their previous formats (i.e. lumped together like accessdate, or underscored like trans_title). – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
I took your original request of "Where is the deprecated citation parameter", and your subsequent actions (null edit, purge) to mean "please would somebody help to stop this error being reported". I did exactly that with edits like this. If it's a valid parameter, it shouldn't put the page in Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. It appears to be a valid parameter; it was being rendered properly in the version that I linked to, with no error message. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Deprecated parameter test removed from {{citation}}.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing space in cite conference

*{{cite conference
 | authors=Abe, M. et al.
 | date=2008
 | title=Ground-based observational campaign for asteroid 162173 1999 JU3
 | journal=[[Lunar and Planetary Science]]
 | volume=39 |pages=1594
 | conference=37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly
 | url=http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2008/pdf/1594.pdf
}}

Yields the following output.

Notice the part that says "37th COSPAR Scientific AssemblyLunar and Planetary Science", which should instead be "37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. Lunar and Planetary Science". Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Well ..., |journal= isn't defined for {{cite conference}}; it sort of works but not really. Perhaps you can do this with {{cite conference}}: 

*{{cite conference
 | authors=Abe, M. et al.
 | date=2008
 | title=Ground-based observational campaign for asteroid 162173 1999 JU3
 | publisher=[[Lunar and Planetary Institute]]
 | volume=39 |page=1594
 | conference=39th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference
 | url=http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2008/pdf/1594.pdf
}}

Or, I think a better solution is to use {{cite journal}} or {{cite book}} because by all appearances, you are citing the proceedings not the actual talk given at the conference. Here's how cite journal might look:

As an aside, I think that {{cite conference}} should be used only very rarely. It implies a presence at a conference and that leads to verification questions and thus a source that isn't so reliable. Were it up to me, {{cite conference}} would just fade away ...

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

The |Periodical= meta-parameter was not implemented in the old version, thus there was no |journal=:
Cite conference comparison
Wikitext {{cite conference|authors=Abe, M. et al.|conference=37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly|date=2008|journal=[[Lunar and Planetary Science]]|pages=1594|title=Ground-based observational campaign for asteroid 162173 1999 JU3|url=http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2008/pdf/1594.pdf|volume=39}}
Live Ground-based observational campaign for asteroid 162173 1999 JU3 (PDF). 37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. Lunar and Planetary Science. Vol. 39. 2008. p. 1594. {{cite conference}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
Sandbox Ground-based observational campaign for asteroid 162173 1999 JU3 (PDF). 37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. Lunar and Planetary Science. Vol. 39. 2008. p. 1594. {{cite conference}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
I agree with Trappist: this citation should use cite journal. Can we disable |journal= and the others for this? --  Gadget850 talk 23:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Limiting individual parameter use to certain citation types wasn't something that was contemplated at the beginning of the switch to Module:Citation/CS1. I think that the genii is out and we may never catch him up and stopper the bottle. There is code (written before my time) that purports to 'account for the oddity that is {{cite conference}}, but it isn't qualified in any way (no test to restrict its operation to just {{cite conference}}) so I'm hesitant to simply add code that would set Periodical to nil or empty string.
Perhaps in the future we can begin to look at restricting which parameters are available to the various citation types.
In the meantime, just say no to {{cite conference}}.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
The solution is to fix the template, not bury our heads in the sand pretending the problem doesn't exist. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Publication within a publication

The Sun Magazine used to appear every Sunday in The Baltimore Sun. (It now appears to be part of it six times each year: [1].) If I am using Template:Cite news for an article published in The Sun Magazine, do I indicate that for |newspaper= or the parent paper, The Baltimore Sun? Thanks! - Location (talk) 21:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Use |department=. --  Gadget850 talk 22:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Gadget on this one. That would look something like:
  • Doe, John (September 13, 2014). "Article". The Sun Magazine. The Baltimore Sun. p. 2.
If you were citing Parade magazine, which is published completely independently of the newspaper itself with separate publication staff, I wouldn't bother to mention the paper into which it was enclosed, whether it is The Baltimore Sun, or The Mining Journal. But in this case, that magazine is a component of a specific larger paper, I would use the |department= parameter. Imzadi 1979 → 02:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Update to the live CS1 module week of 2014-08-24

After the end of this week I propose to update:

Module:Citation/CS1 to match Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox (diff)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration to match Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox (diff)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist to match Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist/sandbox (diff)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation to match Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation/sandbox (diff)

This update changes the things: in Module:Citation/CS1:

  1. Normalize LCCN values before validation (discussion)
  2. Identify and categorize citations with |firstn= / |lastn= mismatch (discussion) Undone. See discussion.
  3. arXiv validation (discussion)
  4. change |CitationClass= tests to require unspaced class names for {{cite DVD notes}} and {{cite AV media notes}} (discussion)
  5. fix bug in |vanc= handling (discussion)
  6. instances of four consecutive spaces converted to tabs

in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration:

  1. Identify and categorize citations with |firstn= / |lastn= mismatch
  2. Add hyphenated parameter name aliases (discussion)
  3. instances of four consecutive spaces converted to tabs
  4. override <code>...</code> css formatting for error messages (discussion)

in Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist:

  1. Add hyphenated parameter name aliases

in Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation:

  1. Add support for "Winter YYYY–YY" (discussion)
  2. Add support for whole date range validation (dmy - dmy and mdy - mdy formats) (discussion and discussion 2)

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Hooray! Our last update was at the end of March. A reminder that, after the update, if you see pages that still show an error message for something that should no longer show an error message, try purging (to refresh the display of the page) or null editing (to remove category membership) the page to fix it. There is more information in this VPT thread. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Trappist the monk I'm trying to modify the sandboxes to include the corrections for {{cite podcast}}; what's the problem?—D'Ranged 1 VTalk 19:52, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
It has been my practice to freeze new changes to the sandbox from the time I announce the update to the live module so that new changes don't disrupt seemingly settled changes. It also gives editors another chance to point out my failings before an update affects untold numbers of pages. As you can see from your post below, that last bit works.
Because you hadn't replied to my last post at Transcript parameter for cite podcast by the time I announced this update, I left it out.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, the current Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox is rendering |id= erroneously as a Usenet ID; |publisherid= was deprecated in favor of using |id=. Wouldn’t it be easier to create a new |usenet= parameter?—D'Ranged 1 VTalk 20:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Comparisons
Template Markup Renders
Example 1
  live {{Cite AV media notes |title=Artist Live! |others=[[Artist]] |year=2000 |url=http://www.example.com |first=Malcolm |last=Johnson |page=1 |type=Liner notes |publisher=Arid Publications |id=Catalog no. K2145 |location=Los Angeles |accessdate=July 2, 2014}} Johnson, Malcolm (2000). Artist Live! (Liner notes). Artist. Los Angeles: Arid Publications. p. 1. Catalog no. K2145. Retrieved July 2, 2014.
  sandbox {{Cite AV media notes/sandbox2 |title=Artist Live! |others=[[Artist]] |year=2000 |url=http://www.example.com |first=Malcolm |last=Johnson |page=1 |type=Liner notes |publisher=Arid Publications |id=Catalog no. K2145 |location=Los Angeles |access-date=July 2, 2014}} Johnson, Malcolm (2000). Artist Live! (Liner notes). Artist. Los Angeles: Arid Publications. p. 1. Catalog no. K2145. http://www.example.com. 
Example 2
  live {{Cite AV media notes |title=Artist Live! |titlelink=Album Title |others=[[Artist]] |year=2000 |first=Malcolm |last=Johnson |page=1 |type=Liner notes |publisher=Arid Publications |id=Catalog no. K2145 |location=Los Angeles}} Johnson, Malcolm (2000). Artist Live! (Liner notes). Artist. Los Angeles: Arid Publications. p. 1. Catalog no. K2145. {{cite AV media notes}}: Unknown parameter |titlelink= ignored (|title-link= suggested) (help)
  sandbox {{Cite AV media notes/sandbox2 |title=Artist Live! |title-link=Album Title |others=[[Artist]] |year=2000 |first=Malcolm |last=Johnson |page=1 |type=Liner notes |publisher=Arid Publications |id=Catalog no. K2145 |location=Los Angeles}} Johnson, Malcolm (2000). Artist Live! (Liner notes). Artist. Los Angeles: Arid Publications. p. 1. Catalog no. K2145. 
The Usenet problem appears to be caused by new code in Configuration/Sandbox that starts with ['USENETID'] = {. Also in the Module itself, search for the new code beginning with -- special case for cite newsgroup which uses |id= for a usenet article or post id – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
This discussion about migration of {{cite newsgroup}} was archived without answering the question of whether to use a new parameter, |message-id=, instead of |id=. Maybe that new parameter is needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Right, forgot about this half-done change. Thanks for the reminder. I think that I'll comment-out the relevant portions so that the rest of the update can proceed.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Done. In the process I discovered that the documentation for the old style arxiv identifiers does not mention versioning as the new style identifiers do. So, I wrote the original test so that versioning was only allowed in the new style. Turns out that old style identifiers may have versioning. I've fixed both the sandbox and the live versions of the module to correct this error.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Documentation needed

We need documentation sections on Help:CS1 errors for the new arXiv and first name / last name errors. Does anyone have a sandboxed version of those new sections yet? If not, I'll start drafting them in commented sections on the page.

The styling change for the error message means that we will need to re-style the error messages on the Help page as well. Is there a clever way to do this for the whole page, or do we need to edit each instance of code individually? – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:40, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

On my list of things to do before the update but I won't turn away willing help. I am unaware of any clever tricks except a change to common.css (which I don't think will fly). So, each <code>...</code> in the example error messages in Help:CS1 errors has to become <code style="color:inherit; border:inherit; padding:inherit;">...</code>.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Error message style in Help:CS1 errors done.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I have added commented documentation to the Help page. I think it will look right when it is uncommented, but I am not sure. Feel free to tweak my wording if it does not make sense; consider my work a first draft. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
And I've rather heavily edited them. I split the author/editor list errors into two descriptions because they really are two separate conditions. I'm wondering if they shouldn't also have separate categories. Have a look.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Your edits look fine to me. I might tweak the wording a bit after it goes live and I can see it in context, but I do not expect to make major changes.

I don't think we need separate categories. In both cases, |lastn= is missing. That's the fundamental error. Now that there are two sections, however, to which section will the "help" link direct editors?

I do think that a missing editor should report "missing |editor-lastn=" instead of "missing |lastn=". The current error message is "missing |lastn=", which is confusing and not strictly accurate.

Cite book comparison
Wikitext {{cite book|displayeditors=29|editor1=Editor 1|editor2=Editor 2|editor4=Editor 4|sandbox=yes|title=Title}}
Live Editor 1; Editor 2; Editor 4 (eds.). Title. {{cite book}}: |editor1= has generic name (help); Missing |editor3= (help); Unknown parameter |displayeditors= ignored (|display-editors= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: editors list (link)
Sandbox Editor 1; Editor 2; Editor 4 (eds.). Title. {{cite book}}: |editor1= has generic name (help); Missing |editor3= (help); Unknown parameter |displayeditors= ignored (|display-editors= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |sandbox= ignored (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: editors list (link)

Is that difficult or easy to modify? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

That's why the error messages identify the particular list where the error was found and also why I added the blurb about the error messages using a bit of shorthand. I'm sure that we can tweak the error messages to get what we want but I'd rather not do that just now. We can certainly refine them before the next update.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

OL parameter not being processed optimally

I have noticed a problem with the CS1 citations' processing of the (little-used) |ol= parameter. You can see the problem in The Carnival. Click on the link in the OL value in the first paragraph, and you will see that the link leads to a 404 error. If you remove the leading "OL" from the OL value, it takes you to the correct page.

This OL is broken: Marjorie L. Burns (1980). How to Read a Short Story (Scholastic language skills). Scholastic Book Services. ISBN 978-0-590-30611-9. OCLC 8000874. OL 10699186M.

This OL works: Marjorie L. Burns (1980). How to Read a Short Story (Scholastic language skills). Scholastic Book Services. ISBN 978-0-590-30611-9. OCLC 8000874. OL 10699186M.

The OLID listed on the resulting page is "OL10699186M", so we should expect editors to put in such values. We should also expect them to leave off the leading "OL", since doing so has presumably resulted in working links for some period of time.

I was unable to find a spec for the Open Library Identifier (OLID); someone else may have better luck finding it. It appears that we might want to ignore the presence of a leading "OL" in the |ol= parameter, however, when rendering a clickable URL for the OL value. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

It isn't documented, but the leading OL is not supposed to be included in the id. I think we only check for the terminator. --  Gadget850 talk 00:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Maybe it's not supposed to be there, but even the Open Library page that you get when you click an OL link shows "ID Numbers: Open Library OL10699186M". That is why I suggest making the code flexible, serving up a working link whether the "OL" prefix is included in the value or not. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I've tweaked the OL validation code so that it looks for a series of one or more digits followed by one of the characters 'A', 'M', or 'W'.
Cite book comparison
Wikitext {{cite book|author=Marjorie L. Burns|isbn=978-0-590-30611-9|oclc=8000874|ol=OL10699186M|publisher=[[Scholastic Book Services]]|title=How to Read a Short Story (Scholastic language skills)|year=1980}}
Live Marjorie L. Burns (1980). How to Read a Short Story (Scholastic language skills). Scholastic Book Services. ISBN 978-0-590-30611-9. OCLC 8000874. OL 10699186M.
Sandbox Marjorie L. Burns (1980). How to Read a Short Story (Scholastic language skills). Scholastic Book Services. ISBN 978-0-590-30611-9. OCLC 8000874. OL 10699186M.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The page about Open Library's API may help. While it doesn't explicitly say it, a link to https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23377687M will bounce to https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23377687M/The_adventures_of_Tom_Sawyer and similar things happen for works or authors. For some reason, no similar handling is done for publishers.
LeadSongDog come howl! 13:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
{{OL}} shows an example of {{OL|ia:publicrecords02conn}} → OL ia:publicrecords02conn which redirects to OL 14052591M. --  Gadget850 talk 14:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I've scanned through the developer documentation (such as it is) a couple of times without finding anything that describes the identifier system. I have often been unable to see those things I have been looking for when they are right before me, so other eyes to look would be helpful.
I'm not inclined to support |ol=ia:publicrecords02conn because the OpenLibrary web site does redirect at least some of these kinds of 'identifiers' to a proper OL identifier. Not all Internet archive material has OL identifiers: OL ia:wargardenguyed00nati. If one wants to cite material on Internet Archive, use |url= and perhaps |via=Internet Archive.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
That disinclination is a good thing. Such records as "ia:publicrecords02conn" are, in many cases, defectively linked on OpenLibrary as "books" but not associated as instances of identified "works". The result is that neither edits to correct the book nor the work record are possible. It's a bug in the OpenLibrary software which mines the Internet Archive database which has been identified but the OpenLibrary database has not yet been cleaned up. LeadSongDog come howl! 17:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I've linked that book under OL records as OL 25620088M and OL 6617739M under OL 7744673W. They are fixable one at a time, once you figure out the technique. LeadSongDog come howl! 17:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Trappist the monk, thanks for modifying the code. I expect that if implemented, it would result in a fair number of error messages that would be easy to fix, but I think that it would be better to silently discard the leading "OL" when creating a link. My reasoning is that we do not have a specification to refer people to, and the OL web site itself shows OLIDs with a leading "OL". – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
That would be inconsistent with the way we handle all of the other IDs. We don't silently ignore PMC or ISBN or any of the other identifier labels. I'd really rather not start making exceptions.
We're sort of at sixes with this one. Historically, CS1, {{citation/core}} through {{citation/identifier}}, has required that |ol= not include the 'OL'; {{OL}} requires that the id not include the'OL'; related templates {{OL author}}, {{OL book}}, and {{OL work}} do require the 'OL'. None of those templates has more than 500 transclusions so it wouldn't be too onerous to change them all to use the id without the 'OL' (which, because it never changes conveys no meaningful information except when the id is used in isolation).
—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I see the issue with silently ignoring the extra "OL", but perhaps a more useful diagnostic is the better way, suggesting the correction to be made rather than just complaining that it is wrong? There's some history behind all this Template:OL/doc and Template talk:Cite book/Archive 6, which indicates there used to be some ambivalence about including "OL" in the identifier, but ultimately what's past is past. LeadSongDog come howl! 22:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
At some point in the dim dark past, {{OL}} may have accepted either OL1234A or simply 1234A, but in its current implementation it doesn't: OL 1234A OL OL1234A.
I have hacked up the sandbox version of {{OL author}} so that it will accept identifiers with or without the 'OL' prefix. See Template:OL author/testcases.
As for more useful diagnostic, that is why we have Help:CS1 errors. We can put a lot more information there than would ever be accepted in an in-article error message. I invite everyone to help us make the help text better.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I can live with |ol=OL12345A being flagged as an error; I'll whip up a quick AutoEd script to fix the errors that crop up, as I currently do with similar PMC, DOI, ISBN, and other ID errors. I just thought that it might be more forgiving in this case to allow the OL, since the definitive source does not really seem to have its act together. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I once came across this very issue and figured out that I need to remove the "OL" from the parameter value. I would support rolling out the {{OL author/sandbox}} code that lets you both include and omit "OL"; it seems useful for the reasons outlined in the OP. It Is Me Here t / c 10:12, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
{{OL author}}, {{OL book}}, and {{OL work}} have been updated to accept identifiers with or without the OL prefix. Instances of |id={{OL|...}} in CS1 citations have been converted to |ol=....
—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

An ISO 639-1 language name test

Sometime ago somewhere there was a discussion about ISO 639-1 that led me to do a brief experiment with mw.language.fetchLanguageName(). Right now, Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration has a table of ISO 639-1 codes and their English meanings (["af"] = "Afrikaans"). It seems silly to me for us to be maintaining a list of these translations if there is some other place we can get the same information.

So, I've tweaked Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox to use mw.language.fetchLanguageName(). In the collapse box is a list of simple cites that use the names and codes from the list in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.

If the tweaked code works, and if mw.language.fetchLanguageName() agrees with Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration then the citation title and the parenthetical language element of the rendered citation should be the same.

{{cite book/new |title=Afar |language=aa}}
Afar (in Afar).

I have been through the list and found a handful of code translations that do not match. Can anyone find others?

  • Afar (in Afar).
  • Abkhazian (in Abkhazian).
  • Avestan (in Avestan).
  • Afrikaans (in Afrikaans).
  • Akan (in Akan).
  • Amharic (in Amharic).
  • Aragonese (in Aragonese).
  • Arabic (in Arabic).
  • Assamese (in Assamese).
  • Avaric (in Avaric).
  • Aymara (in Aymara).
  • Azerbaijani (in Azerbaijani).
  • Bashkir (in Bashkir).
  • Belarusian (in Belarusian).
  • Bulgarian (in Bulgarian).
  • Bihari languages (in Bihari).
  • Bislama (in Bislama).
  • Bambara (in Bambara).
  • Bengali (in Bengali).
  • Tibetan (in Tibetan).
  • Breton (in Breton).
  • Bosnian (in Bosnian).
  • Catalan (in Catalan).
  • Chechen (in Chechen).
  • Chamorro (in Chamorro).
  • Corsican (in Corsican).
  • Cree (in Cree).
  • Czech (in Czech).
  • Church Slavic (in Church Slavic).
  • Chuvash (in Chuvash).
  • Welsh (in Welsh).
  • Danish (in Danish).
  • German (in German).
  • Divehi (in Divehi).
  • Dhivehi (in Divehi).
  • Maldivian (in Divehi).
  • Dzongkha (in Dzongkha).
  • Ewe (in Ewe).
  • Modern Greek (in Greek).
  • English.
  • Esperanto (in Esperanto).
  • Spanish (in Spanish).
  • Estonian (in Estonian).
  • Basque (in Basque).
  • Persian (in Persian).
  • Fulah (in Fula).
  • Finnish (in Finnish).
  • Fijian (in Fijian).
  • Faroese (in Faroese).
  • French (in French).
  • Western Frisian (in Western Frisian).
  • Irish (in Irish).
  • Scottish Gaelic (in Scottish Gaelic).
  • Galician (in Galician).
  • Guarani (in Guarani).
  • Gujarati (in Gujarati).
  • Manx (in Manx).
  • Hausa (in Hausa).
  • Hebrew (in Hebrew).
  • Hindi (in Hindi).
  • Hiri Motu (in Hiri Motu).
  • Croatian (in Croatian).
  • Haitian Creole (in Haitian Creole).
  • Hungarian (in Hungarian).
  • Armenian (in Armenian).
  • Herero (in Herero).
  • Interlingua (in Interlingua).
  • Indonesian (in Indonesian).
  • Interlingue (in Interlingue).
  • Occidental (in Interlingue).
  • Igbo (in Igbo).
  • Nuosu (in Sichuan Yi).
  • Inupiaq (in Inupiaq).
  • Ido (in Ido).
  • Icelandic (in Icelandic).
  • Italian (in Italian).
  • Inuktitut (in Inuktitut).
  • Japanese (in Japanese).
  • Javanese (in Javanese).
  • Georgian (in Georgian).
  • Kongo (in Kongo).
  • Gikuyu (in Kikuyu).
  • Kwanyama (in Kuanyama).
  • Kazakh (in Kazakh).
  • Greenlandic (in Kalaallisut).
  • Central Khmer (in Khmer).
  • Kannada (in Kannada).
  • Korean (in Korean).
  • Kanuri (in Kanuri).
  • Kashmiri (in Kashmiri).
  • Kurdish (in Kurdish).
  • Komi (in Komi).
  • Cornish (in Cornish).
  • Kyrgyz (in Kyrgyz).
  • Latin (in Latin).
  • Luxembourgish (in Luxembourgish).
  • Ganda (in Ganda).
  • Limburgish (in Limburgish).
  • Lingala (in Lingala).
  • Lao (in Lao).
  • Lithuanian (in Lithuanian).
  • Luba-Katanga (in Luba-Katanga).
  • Latvian (in Latvian).
  • Malagasy (in Malagasy).
  • Marshallese (in Marshallese).
  • Maori (in Māori).
  • Macedonian (in Macedonian).
  • Malayalam (in Malayalam).
  • Mongolian (in Mongolian).
  • Marathi (in Marathi).
  • Malay (in Malay).
  • Maltese (in Maltese).
  • Burmese (in Burmese).
  • Nauru (in Nauru).
  • Norwegian Bokmål (in Norwegian Bokmål).
  • North Ndebele (in North Ndebele).
  • Nepali (in Nepali).
  • Ndonga (in Ndonga).
  • Dutch (in Dutch).
  • Norwegian Nynorsk (in Norwegian Nynorsk).
  • Norwegian (in Norwegian).
  • South Ndebele (in South Ndebele).
  • Navajo (in Navajo).
  • Nyanja (in Nyanja).
  • Occitan (in Occitan).
  • Ojibwa (in Ojibwa).
  • Oromo (in Oromo).
  • Oriya (in Odia).
  • Ossetian (in Ossetic).
  • Ossetic (in Ossetic).
  • Punjabi (in Punjabi).
  • Pali (in Pali).
  • Polish (in Polish).
  • Pashto (in Pashto).
  • Portuguese (in Portuguese).
  • Quechua (in Quechua).
  • Romansh (in Romansh).
  • Rundi (in Rundi).
  • Romanian (in Romanian).
  • Russian (in Russian).
  • Kinyarwanda (in Kinyarwanda).
  • Sanskrit (in Sanskrit).
  • Sardinian (in Sardinian).
  • Sindhi (in Sindhi).
  • Northern Sami (in Northern Sami).
  • Sango (in Sango).
  • Sinhala (in Sinhala).
  • Slovak (in Slovak).
  • Slovenian (in Slovenian).
  • Samoan (in Samoan).
  • Shona (in Shona).
  • Somali (in Somali).
  • Albanian (in Albanian).
  • Serbian (in Serbian).
  • Swati (in Swati).
  • Southern Sotho (in Southern Sotho).
  • Sundanese (in Sundanese).
  • Swedish (in Swedish).
  • Swahili (in Swahili).
  • Tamil (in Tamil).
  • Telugu (in Telugu).
  • Tajik (in Tajik).
  • Thai (in Thai).
  • Tigrinya (in Tigrinya).
  • Turkmen (in Turkmen).
  • Tagalog (in Tagalog).
  • Tswana (in Tswana).
  • Tonga (Tonga Islands) (in Tongan).
  • Turkish (in Turkish).
  • Tsonga (in Tsonga).
  • Tatar (in Tatar).
  • Twi (in Twi).
  • Tahitian (in Tahitian).
  • Uyghur (in Uyghur).
  • Ukrainian (in Ukrainian).
  • Urdu (in Urdu).
  • Uzbek (in Uzbek).
  • Venda (in Venda).
  • Vietnamese (in Vietnamese).
  • Volapük (in Volapük).
  • Walloon (in Walloon).
  • Wolof (in Wolof).
  • Xhosa (in Xhosa).
  • Yiddish (in Yiddish).
  • Yoruba (in Yoruba).
  • Zhuang (in Zhuang).
  • Chinese (in Chinese).
  • Zulu (in Zulu).

These codes produced results different from the current table of definitions in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration. Each is accompanied by a link to SIL International (SIL) along with a list of language names. Presumably, where two or more language names are listed, the first listed should be preferred? Right? SIL is, according to the Library of Congress web site, is the keeper of ISO 639 (here is a table of ISO 639 codes at the Library of Congress).

  • Maldivian (in Divehi). – code dv: Dhivehi; Divehi; Maldivian – neither CS1 nor mw.language.fetchLanguageName() use the preferred language name
  • Haitian Creole (in Haitian Creole). – code ht: Haitian; Haitian Creole – CS1 does use the preferred language name
  • Nuosu (in Sichuan Yi). – code ii: Nuosu; Sichuan Yi – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name
  • Gikuyu (in Kikuyu). – code ki: Gikuyu; Kikuyu – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name
  • Kwanyama (in Kuanyama). – code kj: Kuanyama; Kwanyama – CS1 does use the preferred language name
  • Greenlandic (in Kalaallisut). – code kl: Greenlandic; Kalaallisut – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name
  • Central Khmer (in Khmer). – code km: Central Khmer – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name
  • Norwegian (in Norwegian). – code no: Norwegian – bug in mw.language.fetchLanguageName()?
  • Ossetian (in Ossetic). – code os: Ossetian; Ossetic – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name
  • Tonga (Tonga Islands) (in Tongan). – code to: Tonga (Tonga Islands) – mw.language.fetchLanguageName() does not use the preferred language name

With the exception of codes no and to, mw.language.fetchLanguageName() provides an approved language name for each of the codes I've tested here. If, at the very least, code no can be fixed then I think that Module:Citation/CS1 should discontinue use of it's current table of names in favor of mw.language.fetchLanguageName().

In the mean time I will adjust the existing table so that if it takes a while before code no is fixed at least CS1 will be doing correct code to language name translation for codes dv, ht, and kj.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:06, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't forget the parser function {{#language:}}, e.g. {{#language:dv}} → ދިވެހިބަސް and {{#language:dv|en}} → Divehi --Redrose64 (talk) 23:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to hazard a guess that {{#language:}} and mw.language.fetchLanguageName() are intimately related: {{#language:no|en}} produces Norwegian which is the same wrong language name produced in the Norwegian language test above.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
See also m:List of Wikipedias#Nonstandard language codes. --  Gadget850 talk 01:10, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I have tweaked Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox to provide a workaround for the code no problem. This does not fix the {{#language:no|en}} magic word which relies on the same code in mw:Extension:CLDR. {{#language:no|en}} produces: Norwegian. More at WT:LUA#Bug in mw.language.fetchLanguageName()?

With this tweak, I think we can remove the translation table from Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:59, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

If this is intended to appear in the citation, this would be way more helpful if the output was "(language: Langname)" instead of "(in Langname)", an ambiguous construction that relies entirely upon the reader's recognition of Langname as the name of a language. That is unworkable because of the large number of obscure languages on the planet, and the fact that some of them are not distinguished from geonyms or ethnonyms.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  14:49, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I suspect that '(in language name)' is an artifact of published style manuals: this example at CMOS 14.110 for example.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I've been wondering if the categorization that Module:Citation/CS1 applies to pages with citations that assign ISO639-1 codes to |language= is correct. Right now, if |language=de is use then the page is added to Category:Articles with German-language external links. This may or may not actually be true. For example this citation provides no links except to Special:BookSources

{{cite book |last1=Busch |first1=Rainer |last2=Röll |first2=Hans-Joachim |title=Deutsche U-Boot-Verluste von September 1939 bis Mai 1945 |work=Der U-Boot-Krieg |volume=IV |publisher=Mittler |location=Hamburg, Berlin, Bonn |year=1999 |isbn=3-8132-0514-2 |language=de}}

Here, |language= is used to identify the language of the source which is in keeping with the CS1 documentation.

So my question is: Are we correctly categorizing these pages? If yes, then we're done; if no, how should these pages be categorized?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I added some comments about the 'no'/'nb' issue here. – Danmichaelo (talk) 20:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Based on my conversation with Editor Danmichaelo, I have taken the decision that Module:Citation/CS1 will return the string '(in Norwegian)' when editors use |language=no.

I have removed the translation table from Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox so language codes now get the language names from Mediawiki.

Still unanswered is the categorization question. Category:Articles with non-English-language external links appears to have been intended for just that: external links. Right now, the module is indiscriminate. Whenever a citation with |language=<ISO639-1 code> is used, we add the page to the 'language' sub category of Category:Articles with non-English-language external links regardless of whether the citation has an external link. We aren't the only violators of the category, editors use {{xx icon}} to identify a string of text as a particular language (see Borgund Stave Church at the top of the infobox for an example).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

What about using the categorisation that the lang-xx templates use? For example, at Swansea, it has {{lang-cy|Abertawe}} which puts the page into Category:Articles containing Welsh-language text. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know. The text at the top of Category:Articles containing non-English-language text does say that articles added to those categories should be added by the {{lang}} family of templates. That restriction sort of disqualifies CS1, né?
Of course the question that I haven't asked yet is: do we need to categorize pages that cite foreign language sources? My guess is that there will be some sort of maintenance or other benefit that can be gained by doing so. As an aside, I've been thinking that CS1 needs a maintenance category any way so this could be the impetus to create one.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
No opinions? Ok, there is a new category Category:CS1 properties into which we can put stuff like Category:CS1 foreign-language sources into which we put categories like Category:CS1 German-language sources (de), Category:CS1 Spanish-language sources (es), etc. There will be about 270 or so 185 of these language-specific subcategries. I will use AWB to create them all. So that I get it right, are these names acceptable? Is there a better way to name categories that contain citations to sources in languages other than English?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
It is done: 183 individual subcategories ordered by ISO639-1 two-character codes in Category:CS1 foreign language sources which itself is a subcategory of Category:CS1 properties.
To get the list of individual language categories, I copied the table at the Library of Congress website into a spreadsheet; deleted ISO639-2, French, and German columns; sorted by ISO639-1 and removed all rows without a two-character code; used the spreadsheet to make a simple {{cite book/new}} template that used |language=xx where xx is the ISO639-1 code; copied the list of templates to an edit window in Wikipedia; Show preview to get the names associated with the codes as Wikimedia understands them; copied the result to Notepad++ where I used a regex search and replace to create category names and other info to feed to the AWB CSVloader plugin which did all of the actual work.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:29, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

The other half is now implemented in Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox. The code will now categorize pages with CS1 citations containing |language=<lang> where lang is a ISO639-1 language name. The code does not check spelling but is immune to capitalization and will render language name correctly capitalized. Language names that aren't ISO639-1 names are allowed but are not categorized.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Does this test categorize pages only in the namespaces currently categorized by our error messages, or does it categorize pages in all namespaces? I recommend the former; categorizing User and Talk (et al.) pages is probably not useful, since fixing them is often not appropriate and they are not "encyclopedic" pages exposed to regular readers of WP. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:35, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Only categorizes mainspace and only if |language= is something other than en or English. This follows the precedence set by other language categorizes like the {{xx icon}} templates. These:
  • *{{code|{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=gd}}}}
  • *{{code|{{cite book/new |title=Title |language=Scottish Gaelic}}}}
don't categorize here:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000109-QINU`"'<cite class="citation book cs1">''Title''.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=Title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000010B-QINU`"'<cite class="citation book cs1 cs1-prop-foreign-lang-source">''Title'' (in Scottish Gaelic).</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=Title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
but if you copy them to an article in mainspace, click Show preview, you'll see that they do.
But, your question did make me think that we should be applying the same mainspace limitation to categorizing articles with |language=en and |language=English into Category:CS1 maint: English language specified. We aren't right now so I'll fix that.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Should Template:Cite report be listed on this Help page?

I recently came across an invalid LCCN in a {{Cite report}} template, which uses Citation/core, so it did not report an error message. Should {{Cite report}} be listed in the table on this Help page? – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

See the talk page. --  Gadget850 talk 01:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I must be dense. I looked at Template_talk:Cite_report but did not see anything related to my question. I'll explain more fully. It appears to me that {{cite report}} is a CS1 template, so I'm asking if {{cite report}} should be added to the table at Help:Citation_Style_1#General_use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes. Done.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 09:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Then we need to change the CS1 description:

There are a number of templates that use a name starting with cite; many were developed independently of CS1 and are not compliant with the CS1 style. There are also a number of templates that use one of the general use templates as a meta-template to cite a specific source.

To be compliant with CS1, a template must:

  • Be based on {{citation/core}}, Module:Citation/CS1 or one of the templates listed below.
  • Use a period as a punctuation mark to separate fields and end the citation.
  • Use a semicolon as a punctuation mark to separate authors and editors.
  • Format longer works in italics.
  • Format short works such as chapters in quotes.
--  Gadget850 talk 10:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
All of those criteria are met, are they not, with the exception of title formatting? It isn't clear to me why the |title= value isn't formatted in the same way as other titles throughout Wikipedia. The title value passed to {{citation/core}} is |Title= ''&#xFEFF;{{{title|}}}&#xFEFF;'' which undoes normal italic formatting and adds zero-width no break space characters. Why undo the italic formatting and what purpose do the unicode characters serve?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Exactly. This is discussed on the talk page. The template is for "Unpublished reports by government departments, instrumentalities, operated companies, etc" which I also failed to understand. It is redundant to {{cite journal}}. --  Gadget850 talk 11:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
And the manner of usage is also odd. See Area 51 for example. --  Gadget850 talk 11:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that the case has been well made for removing title styling contrary to MOS. As for use of {{cite report}} in Area 51, that looks like a case of profound laziness on the part of the editors. A few minutes in Google turned up pdf copies of both documents:
The U-2's Intended Successor: Project Oxcart,1956-1968
A-12, YF-12A, & SR-71 Timeline of Events
That second document doesn't have the pristine provenance of the first, but editors have been satisfied with less.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The documentation for {{cite report}} is so bad and the title formatting is so non-standard that this template should not be considered part of CS1. I consider the template unfit for any use at all and if I come across a featured article that uses it, I will change it. If the change is reverted I will challenge the FA status of the article. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:54, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the template to the table. Should {{cite report}} be converted to use the CS1 Module? It looks like that would clear up problems with title formatting, lack of availability of some parameters, and documentation. Are there problems that it would create? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Do you intend to keep the existing formatting? As best I recall, the only difference between {{cite report}} and {{cite journal}} is the title presentation and the 'docket' id (which may not be in use). --  Gadget850 talk 14:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
It would seem that {{cite report}} is in many ways similar to {{cite thesis}}. Both support |docket= and both are 'unpublished', and each sets |type= to a default value. Similarly, one might claim that {{cite report}} is similar to {{cite techreport}}; |type= set to default values and 'unpublished' in the sense expressed at {{cite report/doc}}. In both {{cite thesis}} and {{cite techreport}}, titles are italicized.
{{cite report |title=Title |id=ID |docket=Docketname}} → Title (Report). Docketname.
{{cite thesis |title=Title |id=ID |docket=Docketname}} → Title (Thesis). Docket Docketname. ID.
{{cite techreport |title=Title |id=ID |docket=Docketname}} → Title (Technical report). ID. {{cite tech report}}: Unknown parameter |docket= ignored (help)
And what does 'docket' mean in this context? The general definition (wikt:docket) isn't much help. Perhaps 'docket' is a contraction of 'docket number'? {{cite thesis}} adds the word 'Docket' to the value assigned to the module's internal variable ID when |docket= is used with {{cite thesis}}. Is there a real value gained from this?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Where are we on this? Either we change cite report (which will make it redundant), we change the description of CS1, or we leave cite report as a different style. --  Gadget850 talk 20:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm of the opinion that {{cite report}} should be modified to put report titles in at least quotation marks or italics (my preference being the latter). The template is otherwise no more redundant than {{cite thesis}} and should be included in the CS1 family. Imzadi 1979 → 21:31, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
At this point I am presuming that report titles should be unformatted. I will be updating the documentation as such and redirecting the talk page to the CS1 centralized talk. --  Gadget850 talk 14:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Untitled work

I notice that CS1 does not support untitled works. Chicago would use a descriptive phrase where the title would normally go, and the phrase would not be in italics nor would it be enclosed with quotes. So if someone needs to cite an untitled work, what would they do, other than rewrite all the citations in the article to use a style other than CS1? Jc3s5h (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Example? In my mind, untitled would mean unpublished, which would fail the reliability standard. --  Gadget850 talk 13:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I will give an example from Chicago Manual of Style 16th ed. section 14.240:

42. Burton to Merriam, telegram, 26 January 1923, Charles E. Merriam Papers, University of Chicago Library.

Jc3s5h (talk) 13:46, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
That's arguably an unpublished source, per Gadget850's concerns, above, though some might consider it a primary source because it's publicly accessible and validated by the institution. While it's conventional in art-related publishing to treat untitled works as if their title was "Untitled" or Untitled, as appropriate, those are usually also unpublished works. The most common case for this where we'd care about it are small newspaper entries with no title, and these are actually quite common, or were, back in the day. I think the most common way of handling them has been to use their first few words and "..." as if it were a title: |title=Yesterday's Spinks vs. Schaefer match was... |at="Sports" section |department=Sports |work=[[New York Times]].... A |noquotes= parameter could be used to remove quotation marks from around descriptive entries that are not actually titles, per Chicago's usage (and properly documented as to why this parameter would ever be used). A corresponding |noitalics= could also be used, for even rarer cases, to deitalicize names of major works. Actually, the most common use for both cases might be where the title needs to ben manually given in the proper formatting and also be followed by an annotation that should not be quoted/italicized, e.g. |noitalics=y |title=''Serenity'' (original script) |at="Extras" section |work=[[Serenity (film)|Serenity]] |format=Blu-ray .... There are many cases of not-intended-to-be-published works which have subsequently been published as part of bigger collective ones, and which have no titles or have titles, have been assigned later, conventional names in critical lit that are not actually titles, or have titles that would be ambiguous or confusing without such notes. An obvious example is the enormous amount of draft and abandoned and incomplete work by J. R. R. Tolkien edited and published in collected volumes by his son, which includes examples of all three types of cases.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  14:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps something like |description-in-lieu-of-title= (yeah, much too long as a parameter name but could be aliased to an initialism |dilot=). If |title= or |chapter= (or any of the appropriate aliases) is present in the template and has an assigned value, do not display |dilot=; else display the unstyled, unquoted content of |dilot=. Content of |dilot= would not be restricted; |url=, if present, attaches to |dilot= just as it does to |title=. CS1 templates that display |dilot= content would add the page to a maintenance category; it would be inappropriate to misuse this parameter for the purpose of affecting title style in a rendered citation.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:01, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
But |title= is already mandatory. So, the simple way to get at this is to allow styling (quotes or italics) to be decoupled from that parameter when necessary. That's way simpler than that "dilot" stuff, the name of which no one is likely to remember. The real code to implement how you've described the behavior of such as |dilot= would be quite bloated; it's a bunch of nested ifs, and ifs in multiple sections of essentially unrelated code, etc. Let's go with the KISS principle on this.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  18:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
@SMcCandlish: Instead of |at="Sports" section I would recommend |department=Sports: "Regular department within the periodical. Displays after work and is in plain text." --  Gadget850 talk 16:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Noted; that parameter must have been added since the last time I pored over the parameters list in any detail.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  18:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
I have seen sources that incorporated a bunch of other documents (usually memos, letters, or messages) that don't have titles. Should we establish some kind of recommended practice that such items be explicitly "titled" with something like "[untitled]"? I think the strongest reason for that is so that the lack of a title is acknowledged, rather than seeming like a possible omission. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
The style manuals I've read use a description of such works, but don't give any special typographic treatment to the description (no quote marks, no italics) so readers will know it is a description rather than a title. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:12, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

archivedate considered harmful

(in the tradition of Goto considered harmful)

The existence of Help:CS1_errors#.7Carchiveurl.3D_requires_.7Carchivedate.3D makes little sense to me. 99%[1] of archiveurl fields on en contain the archive date within the URL, so the archivedate field is redundant, and where the archivedate field conflicts with the archive date within the URL, it's always the former that is wrong. I therefore proclaim archivedate considered harmful, and propose it be deprecated. --{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 08:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ (guesstimate)
Cute, but... MOS:DATEUNIFY, even ignoring those archiveurls which don't "point to" the date. Can you make the template rendering of the date from the archiveurl context sensitive, so it matches the other dates in the article? LeadSongDog come howl! 13:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't tell if the OP is joking or not. If so, the sarcasm is subtle.
URLs from archive.org typically have their archive dates in the URL, but those from some other archiving sites, like webcitation.org, do not (see, for example, this reference). In any event, someone who does not know how to decode the date in an archive.org URL (which requires hovering over the link with a mouse and reading the URL in the browser's status bar, if it is being displayed) is out of luck unless a human or bot editor converts it to a human-readable archive date. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
For the Owen Edwards example, see [2] to see how timestamps are available. That raises the point though... couldn't a bot check archiveurl strings from major archives for matching archivedate values, and put them in the format appropriate for the article? LeadSongDog come howl! 18:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I think so, yes... I meant to include a sentence in my OP suggesting that CS1 render the date from the archiveurl. I think CS1 could be made to match the other dates in the article; I think dates and templates like {{Use dmy dates}} and {{Use mdy dates}} can be detected too, but I'm not sure. --{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 21:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI—The other day I ran across several archive.org URLs that had bogus values in the date part; e.g., "15" in the location where the month is supposed to be. The URLs were functional, but IIRC they redirected to "valid" URLs. There is no way of knowing how widespread the problem is, but you can't rely on those values 100% of the time. ‑‑Mandruss (talk) 13:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Odd. Can you link to an example of where you found one on-wiki?--{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 00:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikimarkup and COinS metadata

One very common corrupter of the COinS metadata is wikimarkup when it is used to add bold and / or italic styling to |title= (or to undo the default italic styling). The problem arises because the markup gets copied into the metadata. In this example, all of the apostrophes used to make the title bold italic appear in the metadata as a string of %27 which are not part of the actual title:

  • '''''Bold italic''''' title → "Bold italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000122-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''''Bold italic title'''''".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>

In Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox, I have created a function get_coins_title(), that strips the most common legitimate markup from |title= before adding the title to the metadata:

the five-apostrophe cases
  • '''''Bold italic''''' title → "Bold italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000126-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''''Bold italic title'''''".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
  • '''''Bold''' italic'' title → "Bold italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000012A-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''''Bold''' italic'' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
  • '''''Italic'' bold''' title → "Bold italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000012E-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''''Bold'' italic''' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
  • ''Italic '''bold''''' title → "Italic bold title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000132-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"''Italic '''bold''''' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Italic+bold+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
  • '''Bold ''italic''''' title → "Bold italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000136-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''Bold ''italic''''' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
simple bold
  • '''Bold''' title → "Bold title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000013A-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''Bold''' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
simple italics
  • ''Italic'' title → "Italic title".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000013E-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"''Italic'' title".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Italic+title&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>
a combination of all three
  • '''''Bold''' italic'' title and ''italic'', '''bold''', '''bold again''', last ''italic'' → "Bold italic title and italic, bold, bold again, last italic".:
  • '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000142-QINU`"'<cite class="citation news cs1">"'''''Bold''' italic'' title and ''italic'', '''bold''', '''bold again''', last ''italic''".</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bold+italic+title+and+italic%2C+bold%2C+bold+again%2C+last+italic&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1%2FArchive+6" class="Z3988"></span>

The above examples use {{cite news}} because that template renders titles in upright font.

Have I missed anything obvious?

With this fix, the work discussed at Module talk:Citation/CS1#non-italic titles may no longer be necessary.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Renamed function to strip_apostrophe_markup() and now also used to strip wikimarkup from |chapter=.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:52, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know what COinS expects for data, or how resilient it is in the face of obviously bad data, but I would think that any kind of markup that is purely for display purposes is not proper data. Perhaps this is part of a larger problem, of editors trying to coerce the templates? Perhaps that should be flagged as an error? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Accessibility and COinS

There may be an accessibility issue with the COinS metadata that is appended to citations emitted by the {{citation}} template as well as all the Citation Style 1 templates. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 130#Spurious text on source links. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Categories

I have created some new categories. Category:CS1, Category:CS1 errors, and Category:CS1 maintenance. I have added Category:CS1 errors to all of the current error categories listed at Category:Articles with incorrect citation syntax with the exception of Category:Pages with DOI errors and Category:Pages with OL errors. Because these two categories are also populated by non-CS1 templates, I have modified Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox so that errors that previously categorized pages into these two categories will use two new categories Category:CS1 errors: DOI and Category:CS1 errors: OL when the module is next updated.

First use for Category:CS1 maintenance is likely to be to categorize citations that use |asin= where the assigned value is an ISBN. (see Help talk:Citation Style 1#Asin) Another use is to monitor pages that use |script-title=. (see Module talk:Citation/CS1#non-italic titles and Module talk:Citation/CS1/Archive 10#rtl language support in CS1 titles)

I plan to add a properties category which will get as its first subcategory something like Category:CS1 foreign language citations which will then list all pages that have CS1 citations that use |language=. This so we don't continue to improperly (I think) add pages to Category:Articles with non-English-language external links which was intended for other purposes. The conversation about this (such as it has been) is at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 6#An ISO 639-1 language name test.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

All of this is useful. I can imagine a bot checking the foreign language categories for various errors, like misspelled languages and |language=English. The maintenance categories could also be used to highlight other conditions that are not errors, but where improvements could be made, like the templates in |id= that Trappist the monk has recently been editing to use the dedicated parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I have added a new maintenance category Category:CS1 maint: English language specified and supporting code in Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox that will categorize pages with citations containing |language=English or |language=en. These parameters are redundant in the English Language Wikipedia.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I wonder what sort of results we would get from adding "unrecognized" languages to a maintenance category. In other words, if the value of the language parameter does not match a list of known languages, we flag it to be checked. It should not be put in an error category, since some of the values like "English and French" might be OK, but I suspect there are misspelled languages or invalid two-letter codes out there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:35, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Keep that thought in mind. The list of changes this go-round is getting rather long. I'd like to finish up on what has been started, update the live module, and then think about new stuff (and old stuff that I have been neglecting).
—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on the new Category:CS1 maint: English language specified - AWB should be able to fix these. GoingBatty (talk) 23:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Updating the live module?

moved from Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 6#Categories

I support updating the live module. Has the missing editor/author condition been re-implemented in this round of updates? Also, do we feel that there is consensus on enabling any of the hidden error messages? (See discussion above.) If this comment is forking the discussion, feel free to move it to a new section or subsection about updating the module. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing name detection will be part of the next update.
I don't see much hew and cry about against unhiding date errors so I have set the bad date error hidden parameter to false.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:49, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Date when no date supplied

This webpage does not list a date, but does state the copyright, "© 2009-2014 Concordia Theological Seminary", at the bottom. Should I leave |date= blank or use |date=2009-2014? Thanks! - Location (talk) 23:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

|accessdate=
—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Date for ArXiv

I'd like to be able to add a separate date for the ArXiv link specified with {{{arxiv}}} in {{cite journal}} and related templates. For those not familiar with this, ArXiv is a site where academic papers (I think overwhelmingly scientific) can be uploaded for free access and peer review before and while being submitted to regular journals. The ArXiv version remains (freely!) available regardless of subsequent publication elsewhere, and the date of submission can be very different from that of eventual publication. I know that {{{orig-year}}} is available but it doesn't mean the same thing. I would therefore like to add {{{arxiv-date}}} to allow this distinction to be displayed. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 17:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

  • publication-date: Date of publication when different from the date the work was written. Displays only if year or date are defined and only if different, else publication-date is used and displayed as date. Use the same format as other dates in the article; do not wikilink. Follows publisher; if work is not defined, then publication-date is preceded by "published" and enclosed in parenthesis.
--  Gadget850 talk 19:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
If you want to specify a version of the arxiv link, include the v1, v2, etc... part to the arxiv identifier and that's all. If you want to cite the arxiv link specifically, use {{cite arxiv}}. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Date template

Just curious - why doesn't the {{date}} template generate a CS1 error, even though the template's documentation says not to use it within citation tempates? For example:

  • {{cite web|url=http://www.google.com|title=test|accessdate={{date|22 mar 2013}}}} generates
  • "test". Retrieved 22 March 2013.

Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Umm, you added {{COinS safe|n}}, perhaps you should tell us?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Self-reverted my edit to the documentation. GoingBatty (talk) 15:51, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't see any issues with {{date}} except for the template overhead. But I really don't see the use unless you are importing citation data. --  Gadget850 talk 16:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I always use {{date}} in the hope that some time in the future it will be recognised by the renderer, and show date in user's preferred style and language. Overhead, schmoverhead. John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Mon 17:41, wikitime= 09:41, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
If the MediaWiki parser ever gets that feature we will add support to the templates. In that case, {{date}} will probably interfere. --  Gadget850 talk 12:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I think it's unlikely that User:Johnmperry's hope for the renderer to show dates in the user's preferred style and language will ever be fulfilled. During the extensive debates about date linking, it was shown that, in running text, it is impossible to automatically change from the dmy format to the mdy fomat or vice versa without causing usage errors, because the former does not use commas and the latter usually uses 2 commas. So the renderer would have to limit its activity to tables and other structured text which might be predictable enough to automate the change in rendering. Any such change would clash with the unchanged dates in the running text. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:40, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Author alias

I have a work by someone with an English name and a Chinese name. What to do?

What I did was put his English name as author, and his alias as others= alias....

Anyone got a better idea? John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Mon 17:37, wikitime= 09:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Deprecated parameters?

Asked at Wikipedia:Help desk#Module:Citation/CS1.

Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration has a number of parameters commented with "remove after 1 October 2014". I am guessing that the use would be updated, the documentation updated and the parameters removed. --  Gadget850 talk 10:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

I thought about doing that with yesterday's update but there was enough in the update that I just didn't want to add more. The 1 October date is not a hard and fast date. I put it there as a reminder to myself to remove those deprecated parameters that it makes sense to remove. Clearly, |coauthors= isn't ready for removal yet but most of the others can be so will likely be removed at the next update.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Date range

Hi, I just noticed a broken cite journal date in an article. The publication was "date = January-March 1969" but the system doesn't like this, so I changed it to "date = January 1969". But how should a date range be specified? Thanks, Esowteric+Talk 14:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Use an endash instead of a hyphen. Did the link in error message not answer your question? If not, how can we improve it?
Date with hyphen. January–March 1969.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date format (link)
Date with endash. January–March 1969.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah, thanks! Sorry, I was in too much of a dash and didn't correctly read the help. Esowteric+Talk 14:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Similar template with cite web with date format in YYYY-MM-DD

Hello, I am looking for a template similar with {{cite web}}, that is capable to accept the date in the YYYY-MM-DD format and then to transform it into the desired output.

Imagine for example a template named {{cite web US}}, where, when I specify the date like "date= 2014-01-07", it will show it like "January 7, 2014" (or "January 7th, 2014").

And another template named {{cite web UK}}, where, when I specify the date like "date= 2014-01-07", it will show it like "7 January 2014" (or "7th of January 2014").

And then, each Wikipedia will translate that template into their own language. So when you create a reference (manually or automatically), you only have to specify the data in the universally YYYY-MM-DD format, so you don't have to bother to understand how that language outputs the date. For example, at Spanish Wikipedia, "date= 2014-01-07", will output "7 de enero de 2014". Therefore, the same reference can be translated and adapted everywhere (in any other Wikipedia), and then when you use it, you don't need to know how each language outputs the date.

To be more specific, the following reference:

will output it like:

on Spanish Wikipedia, it ({{cite web YMD}}) will output it like:

Is there such a template, or can anyone create such template? Thanks —  Ark25  (talk) 10:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

There isn't such a template as far as I know. There was a time when something similar was done based on a user preference setting. That functionality went away. The history of that in in the {{citation}} or {{citation/core}} archives I think. The problem as I see it is that here at en.wiki, each article can have its own date format style which may or may not be specified by templates like {{use dmy dates}} and {{use mdy dates}}. Templates can only deal with information that they are given so unless each template includes a date format parameter of some sort, it will have no way of knowing what the article requires.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
This has had a lot of discussion over the years. See User:Gadget850/FAQ/YYYY-MM-DD dates, especially reference 4. Bottom line: write the article and the references with the date styles desired. --  Gadget850 talk 11:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
The various Citation Style 1 templates did format dates according to user pref setting (known as "dynamic dates") - for about six weeks in December 2008-January 2009. Not only was it technically complicated, it was also unpopular. In more general terms, Wikipedia deprecated the use of dynamic dates in late 2009, and the facility for performing that function was removed from the MediaWiki software itself with the release of MediaWiki 1.21 in March 2013. It's not coming back. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Wait, I don't need something so deep as a special MediaWiki functionality or article-wide settings for how to output the data. I don't want the template to interfere with any settings. I just need a new template, with this tiny feature: to accept the data field specified in YYYY-MM-DD format and to output it in a certain way. Such a functionality would make it much easier to translate Wikipedia articles from one language to another, because you won't have to bother to translate the dates of every single reference you have in the translated articles. —  Ark25  (talk) 17:31, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I suggest User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates. When you edit it gives you options on the side bar to convert all dates to the desired format. This will ensure the entire article is unified, not just the citations. If you add it to your global.js, it should be available cross wiki. --  Gadget850 talk 18:13, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't need anything like unifying an entire article. I just need the template to output the date as I say. I tried it other way, using the {{date}}, it works, but it doesn't work with subst:

This one works:

  • <ref name="MyUser_BBC_October_15_2014c">{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25462900 |title=How do zoos prepare for dangerous animal escapes? |newspaper=BBC |date= {{date|2014-04-18|mdy}} |author=Laurence Cawley |accessdate= {{date|2014-10-15|mdy}}}}</ref>

And this one doesn't work:

  • <ref name="MyUser_BBC_October_15_2014c">{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25462900 |title=How do zoos prepare for dangerous animal escapes? |newspaper=BBC |date= {{subst:date|2014-04-18|mdy}} |author=Laurence Cawley |accessdate= {{subst:date|2014-10-15|mdy}}}}</ref>

—  Ark25  (talk) 22:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

subst: never works inside <ref>...</ref>, this is a known problem, and is not specific to one template (or group of templates). There's nothing that we can do about it except wait for the existing bugzilla: reports to be actioned. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, it looks like there is already a bug report for it: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72079 —  Ark25  (talk) 09:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Two months in the date parameter

See also cite journal and quarterly publications]]

I want to use a {{harvnb}} with a year parameter of 1828. See here, the date in the publication is given as "February & June MDCCCXXVIII" which before the introduction of CS1 could be dealt with as in a {{cite book}} with the parameters set to the following values "month=February & June |year=1828" or as "year=1828 |date=February, June 1828" How to deal with it now as CS1 barfs on "date=February, June 1928" (Help:CS1 errors#bad date). Of course one can use "date=February–June 1828" or even "date=June 1828", but that is a distortion of date in the source.

{{cite book |title=Date months with an ndash: |date=February–June 1928}} Date months with an ndash:. February–June 1928.

{{cite book |title=Two months fails: |date=February, June 1828}} Two months fails:. February, June 1828. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

-- PBS (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

It looks like that source is the February and June issues of The Foreign Quarterly Review in a single binding. The June issue appears to begin on page 403 – if you 'search in this book' for "list of the principal new works", google will show you two search results at pages 395 and 750. I think that simplifies the problem: cite the issue that contains your source material. If you want to cite the whole book, use the "Published in... as a subtitle: |title=The Foreign Quarterly Review: Published in February & June MDCCCXXVIII and set |date=1828.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:27, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Rather bizarre case, especially if there were any intervening issues. Perhaps they published three times a year, and combined two issues? Something like a single "January—February" issue would be ordinary enough, while two separate issues bound together would cited individually. This seems more like a book which was compiled from two issues, and the "February & June" seems more like a note of the original source than a subtitle. But if you go with this as a date I'd say use "date=February—June 1828". ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_6&oldid=633919590"