Help talk:Citation Style 1

CS0

We have a slew of CS1-adjacent templates for identifiers. For purpose of documentation/style, I propose that we call those CS0 style. Specifically,

• {{arxiv}}
• {{bibcode}}
• {{biorxiv}}
• {{citeseerx}}
• {{doi}}
• {{hdl}}
• {{isbn}}
• {{issn}}
• {{jfm}}
• {{jstor}}
• {{lccn}}
• {{medrxiv}}
• {{mr}}
• {{oclc}}
• {{osti}}
• {{pmc}}
• {{pmid}}
• {{ssrn}}
• {{zbl}}

And possibly others from Template:Catalog_lookup_link#See also.

We could then bring error checking and other features from Module:Citation/CS1, which could share documentation and code, thereby facilitating maintenance etc...

We'd mirror the category scheme, so we'd have, for example

CS1		CS0
Category:CS1 maintenance Category:CS1 maint: bibcode Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive Category:CS1 maint: ignored DOI errors Category:CS1 maint: ignored ISBN errors Category:CS1 maint: ignored ISSN errors Category:CS1 maint: JFM format Category:CS1 maint: MR format Category:CS1 maint: PMC embargo expired Category:CS1 maint: PMC format Category:CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI Category:CS1 maint: Zbl	→	Category:CS0 maint: bibcode Category:CS0 maint: DOI inactive Category:CS0 maint: ignored DOI errors Category:CS0 maint: ignored ISBN errors Category:CS0 maint: ignored ISSN errors Category:CS0 maint: JFM format Category:CS0 maint: MR format Category:CS0 maint: PMC embargo expired Category:CS0 maint: PMC format Category:CS0 maint: unflagged free DOI Category:CS0 maint: Zbl

and the same for other categories, like Category:CS1 errors and its subcategories.

These would effectively have the same documention, and we'd just change "Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2" to "Citation Style 0, Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2" "CS1|2" to "CS0|1|2".

Thoughts? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:43, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I object to "CS0" solely on the grounds that normal humans do not start counting at zero and "CS0" does not enlighten a casual reader. Let's not make this place look even more like a programmers-only exclusive club. I wouldn't be averse to a set of parallel categories with more human-friendly names like "Citation identifier templates: XXX errors". – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Lets clarify what CS1 and CS2 are, before we decide if we should call this set of tools "CS0".

• CS1 by default requires the user to specify what kind of source it is (book, web, journal, etc.) and by default separates the elements with periods.
• CS2 by default auto-detects the kind of source based on which parameters have values and which don't, and by default separates the elements with commas.
• In printed style guides, comma separators are typical of footnotes and endnotes.
• In printed style guides, period separators are typical of alphabetical bibliographies.
• In Wikipedia, endnotes predominate but period separators also predominate.
• The choice between CS1 and CS2 seems to be mostly based on whether the early editors of an article wanted to auto-detect the kind of source, with no concern about whether commas or periods were used.

Considering what a mish-mash this is, I'm not sure we can make a sensible statement about what CS0 means. For me, the reasoning for this term must be all about making it more understandable for editors. If it's all about making the organization of the coding of the templates and modules easier, then it isn't a style at all; it's something like "citation utility template group" (CUTG). Jc3s5h (talk) 17:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

For purpose of documentation and categories

• CS1 templates are all the {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite magazine}}, etc. templates, with a full list here
• CS2 has one template: {{citation}}

For all documentations purposes and categorization purposes, CS1 and CS2 are identical. The only difference is one uses a period for delimiter (with a final period), the other uses a comma (with no final period).

• CS1: Baggaley, W. Jack (2000). "Advanced Meteor Orbit Radar observations of interstellar meteoroids". Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics. 105 (A5): 10353–10361. Bibcode:2000JGR...10510353B. doi:10.1029/1999JA900383.
• CS2: Baggaley, W. Jack (2000), "Advanced Meteor Orbit Radar observations of interstellar meteoroids", Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 105 (A5): 10353–10361, Bibcode:2000JGR...10510353B, doi:10.1029/1999JA900383
• You can make a CS1 template behave as CS2, and vice versa, by using |mode=cs1 or |mode=cs2. User:BrandonXLF/CitationStyleMarker.js is a useful script if you want to know at a glance which style is used in an article.

What I'm proposing here is that for purpose of coding/documentation/categorization/error messages, we call CS0 those semi-templated citations that invoke those catalog lookup templates, and that they share code and documentation with CS1/2 templates when possible. If CS0 offends you, call it CS3 (or CS Platypus or whatever). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:27, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Templates like {{doi}} do not implement a citation style, which is what "CS" stands for. An actual descriptive name would help both readers and editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I know it's not a style. Not the point. The point is to unify and streamline the codebase, documentation, categories, etc. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

If it's not a style, don't call it a style. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Returning to the nub of this discussion, there are issues that would need to be addressed somehow. Mostly it is the variety of parameters and options supported by the identifier templates:

• {{arxiv}} – takes a single value; has support for |archive= parameter; the parameter is documented as deprecated and not apparently used in mainspace but is still supported in the template
• {{bibcode}} – takes a single value
• {{biorxiv}} – takes a single value
• {{citeseerx}} – host appears to be currently dead (502 bad gateway) – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |type= with values doi and pid
• {{doi}} – takes a single value
• {{hdl}} – takes a single value; supports |hdl-access= values free, limited, registration, subscription
• {{isbn}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |plainlink=, |link=, |leadout=, |invalid1= .. |invalid9=, |template_name=
• {{issn}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |plainlink=, |link=, |leadout=, |invalid1= .. |invalid9=
• {{jfm}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |leadout=
• {{jstor}} – takes a single value; supports |stable=, |sici=, |issn=
• {{lccn}} – takes a single value; supports |title=, |name=, |long=; uses Module:LCCN
• {{medrxiv}} – takes a single value
• {{mr}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |leadout=
• {{oclc}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |leadout=, |show=
• {{osti}} – takes a single value
• {{pmc}} – takes a single value
• {{pmid}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |plainlink=, |leadout=
• {{ssrn}} – takes a single value
• {{zbl}} – has support for up to nine identifiers; supports |leadout=

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

All of them should be brought in line with how they behave in CS1|2 templates. Corner cases can be either handled seperatly and offloaded to seperate templates (like multiple MRs/PMIDs being handled by a seperate templates).

I also believe doi, hdl, both support |<identifier>-access=. bibcode, jstor, osti, ssrn should support it too. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I've updated {{arxiv}}, {{biorxiv}}, {{citeseerx}}, and {{pmc}} to display green access locks by default (and recreated {{medrxiv}}). I've also updated {{bibcode}}, {{doi}}, {{hdl}}, {{jstor}}, {{osti}}, and {{ssrn}} to support |<identifier>-access=free. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I've been poking at a module in my sandbox that supports, in whole or in part, all of the above named identifier templates. Some of the current templates use {{Catalog lookup link}}. That template supports up to nine identifiers and the parameters |leadout=, |link=, and |plainlink=. The sandbox module supports these parameters and essentially unlimited numbers of identifier-values for all of the identifier templates.

Some identifier templates have other special features/parameters that are not supported by the sandbox module:

• {{citeseerx}} – host seems to be mostly dead; most often returning 502 gateway errors. When marginally alive, doesn't seem to recognize dois in the form 10.x.x.x (where 'x' is some number of digits). Supports an undocumented parameter |type= which accepts doi and pid as values. Used in <5 articles; those specifying |type=pid appear to work when the host is working; pid type identifiers not supported by cs1|2
• {{hdl}} – besides free, supports |hdl-access= values limited, registration, and subscription; these parameter values do not appear to be used
• {{ISBN}} – supports:

  |invalidn== used in ~120 articles; can be replaced with accept-as-written markup ((..)) if rendered with the sandbox module

  |template_name= not documented; used to identify the template calling Module:Check isxn (a cs1|2 derived module to do error checking)

• {{ISSN}} – supports |invalidn= used in ~10 articles; can be replaced with accept-as-written markup ((..)) if rendered with the sandbox module
• {{JSTOR}} – supports:

  |stable= used in ~5 articles; alias of {{{1}}}

  |sici= does does not appear to be used; cannot be used with {{{1}}} or |stable=

  |issn= used in <5 articles; cannot be used with {{{1}}} or |stable= or |sici=

  |no= does not appear to be used; alias of |issn=

• {{lccn}} – has its own Module:LCCN; supports:

  {{{2}}} (a title or label) used in ~10 articles

  |long= used in ~15 articles

• {{OCLC}} – supports |show=; used in ~270 articles; when used, WorldCat requires registration to view results

Some testing of the sandbox module can be seen in my sandbox (permalink).

Templates not currently supported by the sandbox module but might be are:

• {{asin}}
• {{ISMN}}
• {{OL}}
• {{s2cid}}
• {{SBN}}

Certainly the sandbox module can be used to transparently upgrade these templates:

• {{arxiv}}
• {{bibcode}}
• {{biorxiv}}
• {{doi}}
• {{jfm}}
• {{medrxiv}}
• {{mr}}
• {{osti}}
• {{pmc}}
• {{pmid}}
• {{ssrn}}
• {{zbl}}

With a documentation tweak, {{hdl}} can be upgraded. To upgrade {{isbn}} and {{issn}} (and {{ismn}} and {{sbn}}?) we must replace |invalidn= in instances of those templates; a relatively minor task.

That leaves us with these:

• {{citeseerx}}
• {{jstor}}
• {{lccn}}
• {{oclc}}

If we are to proceed with the notion of consolidating these identifiers with the sandbox module, what to do about these four.

I suppose the more important question is: Should we consolidate these templates so that the supported templates use the cs1|2 module suite?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:28, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I've purged the non-standard parameters from {{JSTOR}}, and updated the hdl doc. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

CiteSeerX pid links purged too. They weren't working, but I converted those without alternatives to regular |url=. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

These five templates were noted above as not supported by the sandbox module. All are now supported in whole or in part:

• {{asin}}
• {{ISMN}}
• {{OL}}
• {{s2cid}}
• {{SBN}}

Of them, two are problematic:

• {{asin}} – used in ~4700 articles.
  • Of those:

    ~2920 articles with numeric identifier (a 10-digit ISBN); the sandbox module will mark these as errors

    <15 articles with 630... numeric identifier (not a 10-digit ISBN but looks like one); the sandbox module will accept these

    ~1820 articles with alphanumeric identifier

  • supports:

    |country= used in ~2990 articles; can be replaced with |asin-tld=

    • of those, ~2880 articles use the template in cs1|2 |id= parameters

    |date= used in ~80 articles; no cs1|2 replacement

    |title= used in <5 articles; no cs1|2 replacement

• {{OL}} –used in ~140 articles

  supports Internet Archive ia:... identifiers (not currently used in any articles; not supported by cs1|2; the identifier can be converted to an Internet Archive url:

  • {{OL|ia:workplacemanagem00onot}} → OL ia:workplacemanagem00onot

    https://archive.org/details/workplacemanagem00onot → https://archive.org/details/workplacemanagem00onot

My sandbox (permalink) has been updated to include example renderings of these five templates.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

As you've been updating these, shouldn't {{arxiv}}/{{cite arxiv}} support |version= ? (and |version-date=) -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 15:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

No. If you're citing arXiv:0704.0001v1 specifically, then you use

• Balázs, C.; Berger, E. L.; Nadolsky, P. M.; Yuan, C. -P. (2 April 2007). "Calculation of prompt diphoton production cross sections at Tevatron and LHC energies". arXiv:0704.0001v1 [hep-ph].

If you're citing arXiv:0704.0001v2 , then you use

• Balázs, C.; Berger, E. L.; Nadolsky, P.; Yuan, C.-P. (27 July 2007). "Calculation of prompt diphoton production cross sections at Fermilab Tevatron and CERN LHC energies". arXiv:0704.0001v2 [hep-ph].

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:56, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

How to map document sources accessed via Ancestry.com to CS1 fields

When citing primary source documents accessed via Ancestry.com, can someone offer guidance on how to populate the citation template fields? For example, the Certificate of Registration of American Citizen (WP:TWL link) for James W McKean, numbered 10160 in the original paper document, has the following source information provided in the "Source" tab on Ancestry.com:

Ancestry.com. U.S., Consular Registration Certificates, 1907-1918 [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2013.

Original data:

Consular Registration Certificates, compiled 1907–1918. NAID: 1244186. General Records of the Department of State, 1763–2002, Record Group 59. The National Archives in Washington, D.C.

What citation template is best suited for such documents, and how should the information be mapped to the author, title, work, publisher, etc. fields? --Paul_012 (talk) 15:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

This sounds like over-reliance on primary sources (WP:PRIMARY). If you're talking about James and Laura McKean, the article reads like too much WP:ORIG from Ancestry.com (or .co.uk) primary sources.  — sbb (talk) 02:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I am aware of that position, thank you. I would still appreciate an answer to the question. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

{{Cite archive}} would probably work, but add a via= parameter and note that it was accessed through Ancestry.com. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion for the revision of the order of SC1 fields

Greetings and felicitations. If and when the order of fields is ever revised, please put "edition" before "series", unlike it is now. Example of the current order, copied from a "templated" reference:

Miller, Timothy S. (2024). Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn: A Critical Companion. Palgrave Science Fiction and Fantasy: A New Canon (1st ed.). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-53425-6. ISBN 978-3-031-53424-9.

—DocWatson42 (talk) 08:51, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Also, I don't see how in "Cite journal" "publisher: pages" makes much sense. Example:

Lane, Richard (December 1957). "The Beginnings of the Modern Japanese Novel: Kana-zoshi 1600–1682". ''Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies''. 20 (3–4). Harvard-Yenching Institute: 644–701. doi:10.2307/2718366. JSTOR 2718366.

Journal (Publisher) makes much more sense to me; or Publisher: Journal.

OTOH, please keep the identifiers in alphabetical order, as they seem to be now (DOI, ISSN, JSTOR, OCLC, etc.). —DocWatson42 (talk) 09:17, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Requesting assistance to fix a broken footnote in Nature Index

Can someone please help fix the footnote in the Top countries section of Nature Index? (I didn't place it there, I just noticed that it doesn't seem to be working correctly and don't use footnotes so I don't know how to fix it.) Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

The article had duplicate "Notes" sections, which I've merged, but I can't see any error otherwise. Could you explain some more? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:26, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

That fixed the problem. Thanks so much! ElKevbo (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

No worries. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 June 13#Template:Vcite journal

I'm nominating the vcite suite for deletion. Feel free to participate in the discussion. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:28, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Generic title

Hello, another Generic title to be added to the list "Request Rejected" i.e. {{cite web |title=Request Rejected }} Keith D (talk) 21:51, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Also "APA PsycNET". Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:04, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Also titles containing "Subscription Offers, Specials, and Discounts" - currently 184 of these. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:17, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Make 'cite preprint' link

Here since a citation to the preprint is intentional, the title should be autolinked, i.e.

• Tong-Hua, Zhu; Chao-Wen, Yang; Xin-Xin, Lu; Rong, Liu; Zi-Jie, Han; Li, Jiang; Mei, Wang (2013). "Measurement and Analysis of Fission Rates in a Spherical Mockup of Uranium and Polyethylene". arXiv:1309.0234 [physics.ins-det].

Should display as (sans the error message)

• Tong-Hua, Zhu; Chao-Wen, Yang; Xin-Xin, Lu; Rong, Liu; Zi-Jie, Han; Li, Jiang; Mei, Wang (2013). "Measurement and Analysis of Fission Rates in a Spherical Mockup of Uranium and Polyethylene". arXiv:1309.0234 [physics.ins-det]. {{cite arXiv}}: Unknown parameter |url= ignored (help)

Same for {{cite biorxiv}}, {{cite citeseerx}}, {{cite medrxiv}}, {{cite ssrn|ssrn-access=free}}. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Update OCLC and S2CID limit values

I have a valid journal article with OCLC and S2CID values above the current limits (link to OCLC, link to S2CID). Could Help:CS1 errors be updated? Averageuntitleduser (talk) 13:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Placement of "Series" in entries

I want to note that it's useful to be able to add Series info to the "Cite book" Template, however, it is badly placed in the final display. The logical place for it is after information about the book title, including edition, and volume number. Right now it automatically comes before these things. "Series" information should follow all of these pieces of information about the individual book and volume info, and be right before Publisher or Location: Publisher. Can someone please fix this? I'll note that this issue was brought up previously as far back as 2017: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_35#Book_edition_vs_series_edition. Peter G Werner (talk) 01:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean, but in

• Last-au, First-au. "Chapter: A description about something". In Last-ed, First-ed (ed.). Title: The Complete Guide. James Oersted Lectures Notes. Vol. 4 (2nd ed.). p. 24. ISBN 978-7815-15-118-9.

My personal issues is that edition should come after the title, not after the volume, i.e.

• Last-au, First-au. "Chapter: A description about something". In Last-ed, First-ed (ed.). Title: The Complete Guide. (2nd ed.) James Oersted Lectures Notes. Vol. 4. p. 24. ISBN 978-7815-15-118-9.

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:49, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Template:Cite book#csdoc_series indicates that the parameter is used When the source is part of a series, such as a book series or a journal, where the issue numbering has restarted. That is, could there be two different books both numbered 1? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:11, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Issue renumbering is for journals, not book series. See Help:Citation_Style_1#cite_note-c17_14.28-5 for details. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Or, to put it another way: cite book and cite journal both have a |series= parameter but they mean totally different things. Perhaps the documentation for this parameter should diverge to reflect this. —David Eppstein (talk) 09:27, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Technically, a book series could have renumbering too. CMOS gives the example of C. R. Boxer, ed. South China in the Sixteenth Century, Hakluyt Society Publications, 2nd ser., vol. 106 (Hakluyt, 1953)., but the series here is used no differently than in the case of journals. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:36, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

That example somehow combines both meanings of the series parameter. "Hakluyt Society Publications ... vol. 106" is the book meaning of a series and "2nd ser." is the journal meaning of a series. I would format this as a {{cite book}} with |series=Hakluyt Society Publications, 2nd ser. and |volume=106. —David Eppstein (talk) 09:42, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Unrelated to this, but what an insane coincidence... In WP:JCW/Patterns#Issues (redlinks), there's a citation that's done badly... It's exactly this work being cited. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

User:DVRTed/refInfo.js script

This script toggles {{ref info}} on your current article. It's very useful for gnoming. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:12, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Citation Lua error

Hello, in my article Senegal women's national football team, the citations are displaying the following error:
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index a boolean value
As a result, the references are not appearing on the page, even though they are correctly formatted and display properly in the preview while editing.

It appears the issue originates from this line in the module:
local tab_data_t = mw.ext.data.get('CS1/Identifier limits.tab').data

Lunar Spectrum (Talk) 00:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Known issue; transient MediaWiki hiccup. Purge or null edit.

It is expected that after the next cs1|2 update, these error messages won't show. The 'fix' doesn't do anything about MediaWiki's hiccups; just hides the fact that MediaWiki hiccuped.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Default fields in Cite thesis

Hi, can the ref and the translated title be added as default fields in the Cite thesis template? Riad Salih (talk) 12:57, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

What is a "default field"? If you are talking about the parameters that the Visual Editor suggests, those are determined by the TemplateData section of the documentation, which is not protected (anyone can edit it). – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

@Riad Salih For the VisualEditor, you need to update the TemplateData, not the transcluded template:

1. Go to Template:Cite_thesis/doc#TemplateData.
2. Click "edit source".
3. Either edit the TemplateData JSON text, or click the button that says "Edit template data" to edit it visually. For the second method, the button that says "+ Add parameter" will allow you to add any parameter. You can copy from a more widely used template's /doc page.

Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

conference= in citation

{{cite conference}} allows a conference paper to be cited with the paper title in the |title= parameter and with the title of the conference proceedings in the |conference= parameter. {{citation}} does not, and raises an error complaining that the |conference= parameter is unrecognized: instead one has to put the paper title in |contribution= or |chapter= and the conference proceedings title in |title=.

This is a (minor) obstacle to making citations consistent (either all CS1 or all CS2, both in appearance and in the underlying template formatting). When the choice is to go with CS2 (usually, to be consistent with some past consistent choice of citation formatting for the same article), it works for most of the standard CS1 templates to just replace them by {{citation}}. The exception is {{cite conference}}, for which this replacement fails and one has to reparameterize. Obviously one could just keep the templates as is and tell them to use CS2 via |mode=cs2 parameter either on the template itself or on {{CS1 config}}, but if we're going to use CS2 I would prefer to do it all the way.

Is there a good reason for {{citation}} to not recognize this parameter or, if not, can this omission be fixed? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I have said in the past that {{cite conference}} should be reworked. In {{cite conference}}, |title= is the title of the presented paper; |book-title= is the title of the conference proceedings; both are included in the citation's metadata. I think that these parameters are poorly named and should be |paper= and |proceedings=. |conference= is a free-form parameter for non-bibliographic stuff: conference name, conference dates, conference location, etc; this parameter is not included in the citation's metadata. I think that this parameter, should go away. Response to my suggestion that the template should be reworked has been indifference.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:14, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Ttm that the main problem with cite conference is that it's a fundamentally flawed template, in as much as it allows for |conference= to exists and contain non-bibliographic information. If you have Proceedings of the Third Marcel Grossmann Meeting on General Relativity, what's the conference here? Third Marcel Grossmann Meeting on General Relativity? Marcel Grossmann Meeting on General Relativity? Ultimately, it doesn't matter, because what you are citing is a book, and what you report is the book title. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Ultimately, what I want is to be able to convert the {{cite conference}} citations to {{citation}} by changing the template name and nothing else. I don't care whether that ability is gained by adding |conference= to {{citation}} or by laboriously reparameterizing all existing instances of {{cite conference}}. But telling me that {{cite conference}} is badly designed and therefore this cannot be fixed is unhelpful. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

The quickest path for that is, at least if you have a DOI, is to TNT the citation and have citation bot expand {{citation|doi=...}} Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:40, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

invoking cite templates

For example in Timeline of the Gaza war (27 September 2024 – 16 October 2024) are dozens or 100s like this:

{{#invoke:Cite|web|date=28 September 2024 |title=Rocket fired from Lebanon lands in Jordanian territory |url=https://aje.io/mycvl0?update=3208935 |website=Al Jazeera}}

I never understood what invoking is for. It makes bot maintenance work more challenging. Is there a reason a bot can't simply convert them to non-invoked ?

{{Cite web |date=28 September 2024 |title=Rocket fired from Lebanon lands in Jordanian territory |url=https://aje.io/mycvl0?update=3208935 |website=Al Jazeera}}

-- GreenC 21:46, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

They've hit the template limit and rather than splitting the article, or not jamming every single thing that has ever happened into the article, they've used invoke to get round that limit so the article can continue to grow into an ever more unwieldy mess. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)