View source for Help talk:Citation Style 1

<!-- Deny citation bot April 2015 because we often post broken citations here intentionally and do not want them to be "fixed". To avoid AnomieBOT substing, use |demo= or |nosubst= instead of adding it here. -->{{bots|deny=Citation bot,SporkBot,Cewbot}}<!--
-->{{skip to bottom}}<!--
-->{{talk header|display_title=Help:Citation Style 1 and the CS1 templates|WT:CS1}}
{{central|text=the talk pages for all Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2 templates and modules redirect here. A list of those talk pages and their historical archives can be found [[Help talk:Citation Style 1/Centralized discussions|here]].}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|1=
{{Wikipedia Help Project|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Academic Journals}}
{{WikiProject Magazines}}
}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive
|format= %%i
|age=480
|header={{Automatic archive navigator}}
|headerlevel=2
|maxarchsize=200000
|minkeepthreads=6
|numberstart=69
|minarchthreads=2
}}
{{FAQ|page=Help talk:Citation Style 1/FAQ}}

== ISBN / Date incompatibility ==

{{mdf|Help:CS1 errors#ISBN / Date incompatibility}}

On the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:CS1_errors&diff=prev&oldid=1285228164 recent addition] made by @[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]], I’d like to point out that an error is detected and displayed even when {{para|publication-date}} is filled with a date later than 1965, which doesn’t seem quite right. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 20:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
:Evidence?  Always provide evidence of failure so we-all know what it is that you are seeing.  Here is a template that uses {{para|publication-date|1951}} and has an isbn: 
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book|authorlink=C. S. Lewis|editor-first=Kaye|editor-last=Webb|editor-link=Kaye Webb|first=C. S.|isbn=0-14-030173-9|last=Lewis|location=Harmondsworth|others=illus. Pauline Baynes|publisher=[[Puffin Books]]|title=Prince Caspian: The Return to Narnia |publication-date=1951}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::{{cite book|authorlink=C. S. Lewis|editor-first=Kaye|editor-last=Webb|editor-link=Kaye Webb|first=C. S.|isbn=0-14-030173-9|last=Lewis|location=Harmondsworth|others=illus. Pauline Baynes|publisher=[[Puffin Books]]|title=Prince Caspian: The Return to Narnia |publication-date=1951}}
:A proper error message.  If I change the date to 1965 (don't do this in real-life unless the date matches the isbn):
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book|authorlink=C. S. Lewis|editor-first=Kaye|editor-last=Webb|editor-link=Kaye Webb|first=C. S.|isbn=0-14-030173-9|last=Lewis|location=Harmondsworth|others=illus. Pauline Baynes|publisher=[[Puffin Books]]|title=Prince Caspian: The Return to Narnia |publication-date=1965}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::{{cite book|authorlink=C. S. Lewis|editor-first=Kaye|editor-last=Webb|editor-link=Kaye Webb|first=C. S.|isbn=0-14-030173-9|last=Lewis|location=Harmondsworth|others=illus. Pauline Baynes|publisher=[[Puffin Books]]|title=Prince Caspian: The Return to Narnia |publication-date=1965}}
:No error message.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 23:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for your reply. I wasn’t clear enough. The error is detected when there’s a main {{para|date}} earlier than 1965, ''and'' a {{para|publication-date}} later. Say:
:::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book|last=Smith|first=John|title=Title|date=1950|location=Place|publisher=Publisher|publication-date=2000|isbn=0-14-030173-9}}</syntaxhighlight>
::::{{cite book|last=Smith|first=John|isbn=0-14-030173-9|location=Place|publisher=Publisher|title=Title|date=1950|publication-date=2000}}
::It seems to me that the publication date here should determine whether there might be an ISBN or not. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 06:12, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
::: There does seem to be a problem here. The help page says, {{tq|"ISBNs were created c. 1965. Books published before that date will not have been issued an ISBN."}}
::: This isn't very helpful - I'm not sure of the exact details, but plenty of books published before 1965 were (presumably later) given ISBNs. e.g. I've just been editing a page and got this error: 
:::: {{Citation|last = Congar|first = Yves Marie-Joseph|title = Lay people in the Church: a study for a theology of laity|year = 1957|publisher = Christian Classics|isbn = 978-0870611148|location = Westminster}}
::: Searching for this ISBN correctly finds the publication in question, even though it was published pre-1965. I don't see the problem with using ISBNs later assigned to pre-1965 publications, or the advantage in displaying a public error message in articles which legitimately and helpfully use ISBNs, assigned after 1965, for pre-1965 publications. [[User:TSP|TSP]] ([[User talk:TSP|talk]]) 11:22, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
::::It looks like the version with that ISBN was published in 1985 rather than 1957. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 17:34, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:::There has been discussion about converting {{para|publication-date}} to be an equal alias of {{para|date}} because over the years this combination of parameters seems to be a source of much confusion and some belief that the paired usage isn't really helpful to readers who are looking for the cited source.  I have started yet another discussion at {{slink|Help_talk:Citation_Style_1|2=&#124;publication-date=_and_&#124;publication-place=_(again)}} in hopes of getting to a definitive consensus.
:::
:::Were it me, I would probably have written your example:
::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book |last=Smith |first=John |date=2000 |orig-date=1950 |title=Title |location=Place |publisher=Publisher |isbn=0-14-030173-9}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::::{{cite book |last=Smith |first=John |date=2000 |orig-date=1950 |title=Title |location=Place |publisher=Publisher |isbn=0-14-030173-9}}
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:25, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:Can someone explain why it was decided to flag up ISBNs on old books as an error. To me it seems counterintuitive to omit a useful identifier or have to use the (cumbersome) use as written syntax just because the book predates the introduction of ISBN. If, as seems to be the case, an ISBN can be assigned retrospectively e.g. a reprint, then classing these as errors feels wrong. A 2014 reprint of a 1950 book is still a 1950 publication. Insisting on |date=1950 and |publication-date=2014 is, IMO, getting overly picky and reduces the benefits of using CS1 references in the first place. If it is of any relevance then at best these cases should be a tracking category and not an error. [[User:Nthep|Nthep]] ([[User talk:Nthep|talk]]) 08:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::I believe specifying date=1950 and |publication-date=2014 for a book published in 1950 and 2014 isn't just overly picky, it's against the guideline. The "[[Wikipedia:Citing sources#Citation templates and tools|Citation templates and tools]]" section states
::{{quote|If citation templates are used in an article, the parameters should be accurate. It is inappropriate to set parameters to false values to cause the template to render as if it were written in some style other than the style normally produced by the template (e.g., MLA style).}}
::I believe this should be understood to mean adding false parameter values to achieve any cosmetic result, including the elimination of false error messages. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 12:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::In such a case, dating the book from 1950 but the publication used from 2014 appears very much ''accurate'', to quote the guideline. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 15:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
The following template produces an error message related to ISBN:
: {{citation | postscript=.
 | title=Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning
 | last=Allen | first=R. H. | author-link=Richard Hinckley Allen
 | edition=Reprint | publisher=Dover Publications Inc.
 | year=1963 | orig-year=1899
 | page=61 | location=New York, NY | isbn=978-0-486-21079-7
 | url=https://archive.org/details/starnamestheirlo00alle/page/61
 | access-date=2010-12-12 | url-access=registration }}
The book says it was "first published in 1963", which is before ISBN was created. There is no information about later editions, but the ISBN in the template is valid. Is there a work-around for the error? Thank you. [[User:Praemonitus|Praemonitus]] ([[User talk:Praemonitus|talk]]) 13:27, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:From [https://www.isbn.org/faqs_isbn_eligibility FAQs: ISBN Eligibility] published by Bowker, the entity that assigns ISBNs in the United states:
:; Historical documents : Yes. Historical documents archived in a library or museum are part of the bibliographic record of interest to researchers. They meet the criteria for discoverability and reporting that is part of the ISBN system.
:[[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 14:11, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
::Why exactly is 1965 the cutoff date? I get that's when SBNs were first proposed, but some books have SBNs/ISBNs assigned retroactively, no? &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 15:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Specifically when there's a reprint of an edition, that reprint gets an ISBN, but the ISBN is the same for accross the same edition (original [1950], first reprint [1970], second reprint [1983]). And that's how you end up with pre 1965 books with have ISBNs. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 15:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::::In such a case, what year would you use as the primary date which appears after the author’s name and in Harvard-style references? I’d go with Smith, John (1950) ''etc.'' (published 1983), rather than with Smith, John (1983) [1950]. It seems to me that the year the author made the text is more relevant than the year a publisher reprinted it. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 17:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::I would go with Smith, John (1950). 1950 is the publication date. If I'm reading a reprint made in 1970 which bears an ISBN, I'd add the ISBN, but would make no mention of the date it was reprinted. It is not customary to give the date a work was reprinted, unless it is a revised or corrected reprint. If that causes an error message, complain until the error message is corrected. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 10:36, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Headbomb}} are you asserting that all ISBNs for pre-1965 books are really ISBNs for someone else's later reprint of a book? Here's one I found (from a Good Article) that as far as I can tell is an ISBN for the pre-1965 book itself:
::::{{cite book | last = Barr | first = Stephen | location = New York | publisher = Thomas Y. Crowell Company | title = Experiments in Topology | url = https://archive.org/details/experimentsintop00barr | year = 1964| isbn = 9780690278620 }}
::::There also happens to exist a 2012 Dover reprint of this book, but it has a different ISBN, {{isbn|9780486152745}}. Can you explain why this citation produces an error, please? —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 05:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{xt|are you asserting that all ISBNs for pre-1965 books are really ISBNs for someone else's later reprint of a book}} -- I'm not sure ''all'' are such instances (it could be), but it's at least one mechanism by which older books acquire ISBNs. It could also be that people assigned SBNs/ISBN to books they had in stock in 1965, and that must have included some from 1964 and a few prior years.
:::::But there's many other reprints and editions... [https://openlibrary.org/books/OL2053719M/Experiments_in_topology] one in 1989, with a different ISBN, others in 1965 published by John Murray and 1972 by Crowell  (no idea what the ISBN is for those). &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 06:32, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::Why would it necessarily be somebody else's reprint? Book publishing companies are often reprinting their own books, for various reasons - an initial print run is usually quite small, since the company doesn't know how popular the book might become. I don't know of any publishers that went out of business because ISBNs were being introduced (some may have ceased trading around that time, but it's coincidence - ISBN wouldn't have been a factor). --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] &#x1f339; ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 06:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Headbomb, I think your reply misses my point.
:::::::The citation is to a 1964 edition of a book, with an ISBN that apparently refers exactly to that 1964 edition. That is, as far as I can tell it appears to be a completely valid citation that does not in any way mix up different reprints. And yet it is flagged as an error.
:::::::Can you persuade me that there is any valid reason for flagging this citation as erroneous? —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 07:17, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I'm really not sure why it falls on me to convince you of something I'm not convinced of myself. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 07:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:: {{u|Praemonitus}}, this is only a workaround and not a solution, but if you use the paren-syntax to ignore errors, then you get:
{{cot|bg=khaki|indent=4em|Example using  {{kbd|1={{!}}isbn=(( &lt;''isbn-number''> ))}}}}
<pre>
{{citation | postscript=.
 | title=Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning
 | last=Allen | first=R. H. | author-link=Richard Hinckley Allen
 | edition=Reprint | publisher=Dover Publications Inc.
 | year=1963 | orig-year=1899
 | page=61 | location=New York, NY 
 | isbn=((978-0-486-21079-7))<!--avoid Help:CS1_errors#invalid_isbn_date in pre-1965 isbn-->
 | url=https://archive.org/details/starnamestheirlo00alle/page/61
 | access-date=2010-12-12 | url-access=registration }}
</pre>
generates:

{{citation | postscript=.
 | title=Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning
 | last=Allen | first=R. H. | author-link=Richard Hinckley Allen
 | edition=Reprint | publisher=Dover Publications Inc.
 | year=1963 | orig-year=1899
 | page=61 | location=New York, NY 
 | isbn=((978-0-486-21079-7))<!--avoid Help:CS1_errors#invalid_isbn_date in pre-1965 isbn-->
 | url=https://archive.org/details/starnamestheirlo00alle/page/61
 | access-date=2010-12-12 | url-access=registration }}
{{cob}}
:: It's still worth working out a more permanent solution, but does this tide you over until you have that? [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 18:27, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I do not think it is appropriate to use the date of a reprint (by the same publisher, not a revised edition) as the primary publication date of a reference. If the citation template calls it out as an error when we include an isbn from a reprint, while keeping the actual date of publication of the edition, then the citation template is broken. The date of publication is important for readers who might want to know how current the information from the reference is. The date of reprint is not. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 20:23, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
::: Thanks {{u|Mathglot}}, that fixes the error in this case. However, the reference is used in a large number of articles so a more general fix would be good. [[User:Praemonitus|Praemonitus]] ([[User talk:Praemonitus|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Yay, another unnecessary error at (as we speak) more than 25000 pages, even though we often simply show the ISBN as given at e.g. Google or even Worldcat (e.g. [https://search.worldcat.org/title/886392028 this] gives an error at [[AD 95]]. Can this please ASAP be reversed? [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 15:27, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

* This error appeared recently in the [[Margaret Sanger]] featured article (twice).  That article is planed to appear on the Main Page of WP soon.  Can the errors be removed soon, please?   Regarding the two cites that are causing the error in  [[Margaret Sanger]], the cites are valid: both are books written around 1920, and both were reprinted (with an ISBN) around 1980.  The reprints in 1980 were NOT new editions, but the publisher attached an ISBN.  So, the cites are correct: the book was written & published in 1920, yet the most recent reprints of the books have ISBNs.  Is there  a workaround change  to "fix" the cite in the article to cause the red error message to go away (without making the cite inaccurate)?  [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 15:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:* Here is an example cite from the above aritcle that is causing the issue:
::: * {{cite book
| author-mask=2
| last=Sanger
|first=Margaret 
| title=The Case for Birth Control: A Supplementary Brief and Statement of Facts
|year=1917
| publisher=Modern art printing Company
| isbn=9780598730961
|access-date=January 15, 2025
 |url=  https://books.google.com/books?id=EkUSAAAAYAAJ}} 
::[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 15:41, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::
::To eliminate the error in the featured article named above, I removed the ISBN from the two cites.  This is really not acceptable:  how many articles are impacted by this?  These sources were written and published around 1920. They are in the public domain, and there are MANY modern reprints, each with their own ISBN.  The cite in the article MUST indicate the publication date (1920) because that is critical for historical context & reader's understanding; and it is also helpful to give readers an ISBN so they can conveniently search for the book online.  Anyway, I've damaged the article (removed a helpful ISBN) to get the red error message to go away. Thanks a lot. /s   [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 15:51, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I'm confused.  In your template:
::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book
| author-mask=2
| last=Sanger
|first=Margaret 
| title=The Case for Birth Control: A Supplementary Brief and Statement of Facts
|year=1917
| publisher=Modern art printing Company
| isbn=9780598730961
|access-date=January 15, 2025
 |url=  https://books.google.com/books?id=EkUSAAAAYAAJ}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::you specify {{para|year|1917}} and link to a google books facsimile that shows a May 1917 publication date.  That facsimile does not name a publisher but does name a printing house (see page 251).  Should printing house be equated to publisher?  Your template names the printing house as the publisher.
:::
:::If anything, I would expect WorldCat to list the various versions of the source.  Not under [https://search.worldcat.org/search?qt=wikipedia&q=isbn%3A9780598730961 that ISBN].  This [https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=%22The+Case+for+Birth+Control%22 title search at WorldCat] finds several.  But you wrote: {{tq|The cite in the article MUST indicate the publication date (1920)}}; WorldCat does not list a 1920 edition.  Archive.org appears to have [https://archive.org/search?query=%22The+Case+for+Birth+Control%22 three copies] of the May 1917 edition but no others.  Is there really a 1920 edition?
:::
:::So, it looks to me like you are citing the May 1917 version but including an ISBN that matches some other publisher's (1920?) edition.  I would expect better of an FA.  By the way, there is (I think) a [https://digirepo.nlm.nih.gov/ext/dw/02610510R/PDF/02610510R.pdf nicer facsimile] at National Institutes of Health (and as a plus, no google tracking ...)
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 16:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Are you reversing this yet? Or will you continue to let this disruptive change stand until you are somehow forced to revert it? [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 16:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::I for one would support forcing this to be reverted if it comes to that. As I said above, it is necessary to cite reprinted works under their original publication date, but the isbn of a reprint can nevertheless be useful. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 17:02, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::::The Sanger book ''The Case for Birth Control:A Supplementary Brief and Statement of Facts'' was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Margaret_Sanger&diff=next&oldid=259011264 added] by {{user|Ando228}} on 19 December 2008. At that time, no ISBN was provided, but a [http://pds.harvard.edu:8080/pdx/servlet/pds?id=2575249&n=2&s=4&res=3 link to a free Google version] was provided, and still works. The publication date on the title page is May 1917. There is an imprint on the title page, but I don't know if it's just a decoration, or indicates the publisher. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 17:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::This is the actual original google books link: http://books.google.com/books?id=EkUSAAAAYAAJ; the link you gave us is very dead and points somewhere other than google books.
:::::
:::::For completeness, and because I was curious, here is a brief history of the various changes to the publication description:
:::::*[[Special:Diff/259015516|the original mention]] followed by these changes:
:::::**[[Special:Diff/453911291]] – cosmetic
:::::**[[Special:Diff/453923346]] – cosmetic
:::::**[[Special:Diff/455840111]] – cosmetic
:::::**[[Special:Diff/469176808]] – cosmetic
:::::**[[Special:Diff/621939014]] – cosmetic
:::::**[[Special:Diff/650347033]] – switch from google books url to archive.org url
:::::**[[Special:Diff/667325814]] – switch url from <code>http</code> to <code>https</code>
:::::**[[Special:Diff/1269409563]] – switch to {{tlx|cite book}} with the original google books url (<code>https</code>) and {{para|isbn|9780598730961}}
:::::Interestingly, all of these specify a 1917 or May 1917 date; never any other date.
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 23:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::::@[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] - So, you spent several minutes researching and  typing an elaborate reply, essentially blaming the victim?  Your time would be better spent addressing the issue of how to avoid damaging cites that are historical books that have post-1965 reprints. [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 19:42, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::I am not {{tq|blaming the victim}}.  I am attempting to analyse the template and explain to myself, to you, and to anyone else who will read this thread, why the error message is correct for that template.  You didn't answer my question: {{tq|Is there really a 1920 edition?}}  Where does the 1920 publication date come from?
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 23:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
I've raised the issue at [[WP:ANI#Template edit incorrectly creating error cat with 25000+ entries needs reverting]]. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 17:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Maybe this should be changed to a message instead of an error. It's definitely useful when it highlights actual issues, but there appears there are a lot of edge cases causing false positives. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 17:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:Could do.  But the demand appears to be for reversion.  When editors work themselves up to brandishing [[WP:ANI#Template edit incorrectly creating error cat with 25000+ entries needs reverting|WP:ANI]] torches and pitchforks, is there any reason to expect that changing the error message to a maintenance message will be acceptable?
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 23:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:: Addressing this seems like a task for a bot. Why not an 'ISBN-status' flag for validation? I.e. 'ISBN-status=reprint' for example. [[User:Praemonitus|Praemonitus]] ([[User talk:Praemonitus|talk]]) 00:32, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I don't know about a bot, but what if we use {{para|type}}?  If you are citing a reprint of a source published before 1965, setting {{para|type|Reprint}} could suppress the incompatibility error message.  This would not emit the ignored-isbn-error maint message that you get when you wrap the {{para|isbn}} value in accept-as-written markup.  Perhaps there are other type values that might suppress the incompatibility error?
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 01:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::{{para|Type}} seems most commonly used for the nature of the document, rather than the format of publication. The examples given on [[Template:Cite book]] are “Thesis, Booklet, Accepted manuscript, CD liner, Press release”. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 04:54, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::I think that you are reading strictures into that text that just do not exist; likely because cs1|2 documentation is so notoriously awful.  The documentation for {{para|type}} is at [[Template:Citation Style documentation/type]] which is transcluded into most, if not all, cs1|2 template doc pages.  I see no reason for us to accept {{para|type|preprint}} and at the same time reject {{para|type|reprint}}.
:::::
:::::{{para|type|Reprint}} isn't used often, but editors do [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?go=Go&search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+book%22+insource%3A%22reprint%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7C+*type+*%3D%5B%5E%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D*%5BRr%5Deprint%2F&ns0=1 use it].
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::Regardless of the parameter used, I suggest that normally we don't need to indicate we read a reprint; it isn't customary to specify which reprint one read (e.g. I read the 6th impression of [[Jean Meeus]]'s ''Astronomical Algorithms'', 2d ed.) It is useful to specify that a source was a preprint, because this warns everyone that it hasn't finished the peer review process.
::::::I find it offensive to be told that I have to specify extra parameters to help some error detection code detect errors made largely by damn bots. Put the burden of fixing these errors on the editors and bot masters that made the errors. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 15:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Your mileage may vary, but all the errors I'm encountering so far were by well-meaning humans, plugging in randomly-chosen ISBNs for works that don't actually have them. Many of these errors are probably over a decade old. In any case, a citation that claims an ISBN for a work before ISBNs existed ought to be checked for those and other errors. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 16:04, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I meant to add that editors who want to seek out and fix errors are certainly encouraged to do so. But I shouldn't have to do extra chores when a later impression of a mid-1960s book that has an ISBN, to see if the first impression had an ISBN. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Bots are very bad at handling inconsistent metadata. A large fraction of the CS1 errors that I find and fix turn out to be bot-caused mixups between a reference to a book review and added metadata for the book itself, or between a publication and its later reprint. For example [[Special:Diff/1194338099|here is citation bot breaking a reference to a journal book review]] by mixing it up with metadata from a reprint of the review in a book, triggered by the book reprint doi. In these cases we already know that most of them are inconsistencies between metadata for different publications of the same material, exactly the case that the bots are bad at. Telling a bot to fix these is a recipe for disaster. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 05:30, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::I concur. I've tried to get some of the bots to do less "rescuing" and instead ignore cases that they know they can't fix, but I've met with significant resistance ... not unlike the resistance we see here. -- [[User:Mikeblas|mikeblas]] ([[User talk:Mikeblas|talk]]) 14:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
::I think toning it down to a maintenance message could be a fine compromise, as long as it is admitted that in certain cases a pre-1965 primary date and an ISBN are not incompatible and therefore need not be “corrected”. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 04:54, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::As far as I can tell the best correction is to stop using the citation templates for some of this information. It's simple: make the templates useless, we stop using them. [[Special:Diff/1286173042|An example]]. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 05:25, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::It definitely highlights cites that need fixing. Unfortunately there's a tendency to change cites to the first publication date, even if that wasn't the version used for verification and doing so makes all the page numbers invalid. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 11:00, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] while the merits get discussed, would changing line 1754 in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration from false to true at least hide the error message? [[User:Nthep|Nthep]] ([[User talk:Nthep|talk]]) 09:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Yeah, it will, but will hiding the error message actually do any good?  It will take some time before the job queue refreshes every page that is showing the error.  The error messages will remain visible to those editors who have the necessary personal css to show hidden errors ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22.cs1-hidden-error%22+intitle%3A%2F%5C.css%2F&ns2=1 ~980 editors]). When all of the error messages are hidden, the impetus to discuss will have dissipated and like so many discussions, here and elsewhere, discussion on the merits will be abandoned without consensus.
:::
:::So, what is the consensus here now? Hide? Don't hide?
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 13:46, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Hide. Too many "errors" which are not actually errors. If it's good enough for Worldcat[https://search.worldcat.org/title/499513124] and the like, it should be good enough for us. These ISBNs help readers find the correct document, removing them makes the articles worse, not better. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:56, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::And with "hide", I mean "revert the change and try to find a consensus for a better solution, if one is needed". [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:56, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::I agree with Fram's sentiment: abolish the test for improbable dates for ISBN-tagged publications; IOW: revert to status quo ante. -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 14:22, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Hide for now, the test is useful but is creating to many false positives amongst edge cases. As I said earlier it could be that it should be converted to a message instead. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 14:25, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Agree.  I'm seeing several situations where the ISBN appears to be for a Google digital reprint date (e.g. [[Alben W. Barkley]]).  Having the Google digital date as the first date for the citation rather than the actual original publishing date is not ideal.<span style="font-family: Constantia">[[User:Mojo Hand|Mojo Hand]] ''([[User talk:Mojo Hand|talk]])''</span> 15:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
I have edited [[Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration]] to hide the error message. The test for ISBN/ date compatibility still exists in [[Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers]], I've just hidden the outcome of positive tests. [[User:Nthep|Nthep]] ([[User talk:Nthep|talk]]) 11:53, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:Hidden it may be, but pages are still categorised to {{cl|CS1 errors: ISBN date}} - I tried nullediting a few of these, and they didn't drop out of the cat. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] &#x1f339; ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 12:27, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::the test is still being applied and an addition to the category being made. All I've done is hide the error message appearing in the article (or should do once the job queue catches up). [[User:Nthep|Nthep]] ([[User talk:Nthep|talk]]) 13:11, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::It would have been preferable to out-comment the whole block <code>err_invalid_isbn_date = { … },</code>. -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 13:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::: The result of that particular code change would have been to cause every citation containing this error to fail with a Lua error. I tested it in [[Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox]]. If there is a consensus to disable this entire error message, including the category, rather than merely hiding it, I could do that (although maybe [[WP:CFD]] would be a better venue). [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 14:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Hiding the error message removes red error messages from pages, but hiding category entirely doesn't seem wise to me. This check is surfacing real errors, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=5th_ward%2C_Chicago&diff=1286385291&oldid=1275448124 like this 2013 reprint] being cited as the original 1885 book. The errors are often easy to fix. The problem with hiding error messages is that unless there is a dedicated group of editors working their way through the category, errors are unlikely to be fixed, since they are hidden. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 16:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::The first time I saw this error was for a book supposedly published in the 17th century with a modern publisher and ISBN. There is a real issue, the problem is all the false positive edge cases. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 18:09, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I clicked on three or four random articles and found no false positives, only errors. I recognize that this is a small sample. Is there a general description of a false positive? If so, that might be worked into the code. Please link to three or four articles with false positive edge cases. Thanks. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 19:06, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I'm only taking a lead from the comments of other editors above. The most common point they seem to raise are works that are reprints without a later publication date. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 20:32, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::If someone is citing a reprint, they should say so, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=October_1925&diff=prev&oldid=1286410202 like this], per [[WP:SAYWHERE]]. The {{para|orig-year}} parameter makes this easy. There is no guarantee that a reprinted book will have the same pagination or exactly the same content. [https://harpercollins.co.uk/blogs/glossary/what-is-reprint Harper Collins, for example], says that a reprint is a new edition, "typically with minor changes or updates". And an update to my earlier "three or four": I clicked on another half-dozen random articles in the category and found only errors. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 21:06, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
{{od|9}}{{ping|Jonsey95}} I don't agree.
In the ''Chicago Manual of Style'' 18th ed. part about publishing and editing
{{quote| ¶ 1.25 '''Copyright dates of previous editions.''' Each substantially new edition of a book gets a new copyright date.... (Note that this advice does not apply to a new impression, or reprinting, or to a paperback or electronic version that does not constitute a new edition; see 1.28.)}}

¶ 1.26 '''Copyright notice''' states "The year of publication should correspond to the copyright date." I take this to mean if the text is the same, so it isn't eligible for a new copyright, then it's the same publication date.

{{quote |¶ 1.28 '''What constitutes a new edition?''' ''Edition'' (as opposed to ''impression'' or ''printing'') is used in at least two senses. (1) A ''new'' edition, as in a ''second'' or other numbered edition, may be defined as one in which a substantial change has been made in one or more of the essential elements of the work (e.g., text, notes, appendixes, or illustrations).... (2) ''Edition'' may also be used to designate a reissue in a different ''format'' (e.g., a paperback, deluxe, or illustrated edition, or an ebook edition of a book previously available only in print, or under the imprint of a different publisher.}}

In the part of CMoS about citing sources 
{{quote |¶ 14.42 '''New impressions and renewal of copyright.''' The publication date must not be confused with the date of a subsequent printing or a renewal of copyright. Such statements on the copyright page as "53rd impression" or "Copyright renewed 1980" should be disregarded....}}

This agrees with what I learned when I was using other style manuals,such as [[APA Style]], and with what I've generally seen on Wikipedia. That's why no {{para|reprint}} parameter exists. The {{para|orig-date}} would be useful if it were helpful to give the date of the 1st edition when citing the 8th edition, or similar situation. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 22:00, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:All of the erroneous citations I have found (and fixed) have been {{tq|under the imprint of a different publisher}}, criterion 1.28 (2) above for noting a different edition. I'm still hoping someone will link to a sample of actual false positives. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 13:42, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
::Somewhere in this thread there's probably a hint about how to look for false positives, but the thread has gotten too long to find it. Even if I found a potential false positive, I probably couldn't be sure without knowing what the editor who created the citation actually read. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I'll note that of the first few I've spot-checked so far, several were reprints, one had an ISBN that returned no results from Worldcat, and another (on [[Channel Tunnel]]) has an ISBN and archive.org link that point to a completely different book. Seems useful to me to correct these. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 15:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
:My experience has been similar. I have found reprints by different publishers (which appear to qualify as separate editions, per the CMS quoted above), pre-1967 books for which Google Books has listed ISBNs for no apparent reason (I'm guessing that reFill and other tools have simply pulled in some of these ISBNs from Google Books without checking for validity), ISBNs that lead to books that are different from the work being cited or linked to from archive.org, and ISBNs that lead to editions other than the one being cited. Lots of errors. No false positives yet. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 16:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
::My findings mirror this - mostly I'm finding cases where somebody pulled the ISBN from a later edition, but bots getting the Google Books provided ISBN for reprints/ebooks of earlier print editions. My favourite is [[Special:Diff/983181287|this amazing edit]] where Citation bot decided to add the an ISBN from a 2007 English-language book to five individual Polish-language books from the 1950s. Complete garbage. No idea where it got that from. [[User:GreenLipstickLesbian|<span style="color:#EB0533;">GreenLipstickLesbian</span>]][[User Talk:GreenLipstickLesbian|💌]][[Special:Contribs/GreenLipstickLesbian|🦋]] 17:05, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I tried to autofill the Barkley (1954) citation from the [[Alben W. Barkley]] references (mentioned by {{u|Mojo Hand}} above). With the [https://www.google.com/books/edition/That_Reminds_Me/tz53AAAAMAAJ Google Books URL], autofill methods all output "978-0-598-75444-8" as the {{para|isbn}} parameter. I can't get any ISBN lookup sites to give me a result for that ISBN.
:::;RefToolbar
::::{{cite book |last1=Barkley |first1=Alben William |title=That Reminds Me |date=1954 |publisher=Doubleday |isbn=978-0-598-75444-8 |url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/That_Reminds_Me/tz53AAAAMAAJ |language=en}}
:::;ProveIt
::::{{Cite book |last=Barkley |first=Alben William |url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/That_Reminds_Me/tz53AAAAMAAJ |title=That Reminds Me |date=1954 |publisher=Doubleday |isbn=978-0-598-75444-8 |language=en}}
:::;VisualEditor
::::{{Cite book |last=Barkley |first=Alben William |url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/That_Reminds_Me/tz53AAAAMAAJ |title=That Reminds Me |date=1954 |publisher=Doubleday |isbn=978-0-598-75444-8 |language=en}}
:::Is there a way for the various autofill methods to ignore ISBNs before the cutoff date? Unlike a human editor, they'll have no way to discern if the ISBN is relevant.  It is possible to prevent citoid from pulling ISBNs in general by editing the TemplateData, but most {{tl|cite book}} and {{tl|citation}} invocations are likely for recent publications, so that seems like undesirable overkill. [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 20:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

::::While we look at other solutions, I suggest we make this a CS1 maintenance message rather than an error message?  Hiding the error message is an improvement, but having all these new CS1 error messages overwhelms and clutters the regular repair work I do.--<span style="font-family: Constantia">[[User:Mojo Hand|Mojo Hand]] ''([[User talk:Mojo Hand|talk]])''</span> 14:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::How is that?  At [[User:Mojo Hand/common.css]] you are enabling the display of maintenance messaging so, for you, the hidden error messages would become visible maintenance messages.  Seems to me that you would be trading one clutter for another...
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::Maintenance issues are displayed in green, which distinguishes them from the red error messages.  The fact that the maintenance issues do not affect the reader experience also makes them less urgent for me to deal with.  I try to fix CS1 errors, especially ones for BLP articles, for a Wikiproject.  This sudden large influx of new error messages swamps the regular cleaning I try to do.  Hiding this error message improves the reader experience, but makes it harder to locate the issue if I am interested in fixing it.--<span style="font-family: Constantia">[[User:Mojo Hand|Mojo Hand]] ''([[User talk:Mojo Hand|talk]])''</span> 00:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::You can unhide the error message for yourself the same way you have unhidden the maintenance messages.  To display hidden-by-default <span style="color:#d33">error messages</span>, see {{slink|Help:CS1_errors|Controlling_error_message_display}}.
:::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 00:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::::A condition that issues an error message for >33000 pages ({{cl|CS1 errors: ISBN date|count=yes}}) doesn't seem meaningful. -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 03:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Meanwhile, I keep seeing new instances of this error generated by Citation bot adding bad reprint isbns to old references, sometimes on articles where previous instances of the same error have already been manually corrected, and no response to my error report saying as much a week after I filed it: [[User talk:Citation bot/Archive 41#Adds isbn for book with publication year before 1965]]. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 07:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

===Patterns fixable with AWB===
* If anyone wants to fire up AWB, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%2F%5C%7Cisbn%3D978%5C-8170192329%2F+insource%3A%2F1957%2F&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns126=1&ns127=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1 here are 330 pages] that need an invalid ISBN replaced with an OCLC identifier, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pachliopta_aristolochiae&diff=prev&oldid=1286532837 like this]. (Butterflies of the Indian Region) – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 14:04, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
*And here are [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%2F0%5C-679%5C-50013%5C-8%2F+insource%3A%2F1959%2F&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns126=1&ns127=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1 145 pages], to be fixed [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Major_general&diff=1286561044&oldid=1278280509 like this]. (The Civil War Dictionary) – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 17:25, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

===Unidentified reprints===
There appears to be an issue with publications of the [[Railway Correspondence and Travel Society]] where they've issued ISBNs to works published before 1965 without altering the text or otherwise indicating that they're reprints. See for example [[Template talk:RCTS-LocosGWR-6]]. A permanent state of error is undesirable. There is no consensus to use the OCLC number instead. Ideas? [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 22:12, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

== |page= same value as last n-digits of |doi= ==

I'm seeing more and more of this sort of misuse of {{para|page(s)}}.  What to do about templates like this where {{para|page(s)}} matches the trailing digits of {{para|doi}}?
:<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal |last1=Kesari |first1=Vigya |last2=Ramesh |first2=Aadi Moolam |last3=Rangan |first3=Latha |title=''Rhizobium pongamiae'' sp. nov. from root nodules of ''Pongamia pinnata'' |journal=BioMed Research International |volume=2013 |pages=165198 |year=2013 |pmid=24078904 |pmc=3783817 |doi=10.1155/2013/165198 |doi-access=free }}</syntaxhighlight>
Example template taken from [[Special:Diff/1195261469|this edit]].

If we look at the [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2013/165198 pdf version of the article], we can see that <code>165198</code> is the article ID so <code>165198</code> properly belongs in {{para|article-number}}.

Maintenance message?  {{tlx|citation}} with {{para|journal}} and {{tlx|cite journal}} templates only?  Value assigned to {{para|page(s)}} must be greater than some threshold value, perhaps 9999?  Other constraints?

—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 16:44, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:The example came from this edit[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rhizobium&diff=prev&oldid=1006413516] a few years prior. I thought this would be citoid being flaky, but it just ignores the article number (at least now it does).<br />I've come across a limited selection of journals that run there page numbers across issues in the same year, but even then they don't get to over 10k page numbers. A maintenance message would be good as the page number is obviously invalid, although I wouldn't think there's that many. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 20:22, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+journal%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B+*%5BCc%5Dite+journal%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C+*pages%3F+*%3D+*%5B0-9%5D%7B5%2C%7D%5Cs*%5B%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2F&ns0=1 This crude search] (times out) suggests that there are more than 4000 articles that have {{para|page(s)}} with five-digit values.  There are journals that do use 5 digit pagination: {{doi|10.1073/pnas.1203495109|doi-access=free}}
::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 20:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::As you know my ability to write regex extends to asking someone else how to do it, but I expected that that would time out. Could the code be set to check configuration and ignore certain journals? It would allow a method to hide false positives en masse, 10.1073 alone has tens of thousands of uses. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 23:22, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::::{{tq|Could the code be set to check configuration and ignore certain journals?}}  What code are you asking about?  The regex?  The cs1|2 module?  Sommat else?
::::
::::If the regex: not really.  We can exclude all articles that have the doi prefix <code>10.1073</code> ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ns0=1&search=insource%3A%2210.1073%22 ~26000]).  [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+journal%22+-insource%3A%2210.1073%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B+*%5BCc%5Dite+journal%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C+*pages%3F+*%3D+*%5B0-9%5D%7B5%2C%7D%5Cs*%5B%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2F&ns0=1 This search found] ~3350 articles but it also times out.
::::
::::If the cs1|2 module: yes if necessary.
::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 13:32, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Sorry that was ambiguous, I did mean the cs1|2 module. That way any other journals  that commonly use such large pages numbers could be excluded using the same method. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 18:10, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::I'm not convinced that we need to filter by doi prefix.  Generally, these days, {{tlx|cite journal}} templates use {{para|page(s)}} to list a page-range so a journal citation with five-digit pagination will contain some form of dash.  When a {{para|page(s)}} value has dashes, commas, or semicolons, the code will skip the test.
::::::
::::::Journals use a variety of formats for article numbers: some are all digits, some are alphanumeric, some begin with a lowercase 'e', some numeric forms include a dot in the matching doi.  It may not be possible to create a test that will find all possible article numbers in {{para|page(s)}} but we can start with these more-or-less common formats and see where that gets us.
::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 19:02, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:Physical Review journals have pages in the 6 digit range, e.g. {{doi|10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.170405}}. 22:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC) &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 22:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::But those seem to be article numbers, not page numbers. Looking at the PDF for the article you linked, I see pages numbered from "170405-1" to "170405-4". FWIW, what I assume to be the [[Copyright Clearance Center|CCC]] string is "0031-9007=02=89(17)=170405(4)$20.00".
::[[User:Sollyucko|Solomon Ucko]] ([[User talk:Sollyucko|talk]]) 21:22, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:
:As an experiment, I have written an awb script that trawls articles looking for {{tlx|cite journal}} templates that have {{para|doi}} and {{para|page(s)}}.  The list of tested articles is more-or-less the first 25000 articles that transclude {{tld|cite journal}} – the same list you would get from [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Cite journal]].  The most recent test found 9575 {{tld|cite journal}} templates that have {{para|doi}} and {{para|page(s)}} that meet certain criteria.  The script skips templates that have {{para|page(s)}} values that:
:*are ranges separated by underscore, hyphen, emdash, endash, figure dash, or minus character
:*are comma- or semicolon-separated lists of pages
:*have external urls
:*are digit-only values less than 10000
:
:For those templates that are not skipped, the script compares the trailing (rightmost) characters of the {{para|doi}} value against the whole value of the {{para|page(s)}} value.  When there is a match, the script saves the {{para|doi}} and {{para|page(s)}} values to a file with the test result.
:
:When the first test does not indicate a match, the script modifies the {{para|page(s)}} value:
:*when the value is exactly 8 digits, the script inserts a dot between the fourth and fifth digits and retests against the {{para|doi}} value
:*when the first character is a lowercase <code>e</code>, the script removes that character and retests against the {{para|doi}} value
:*when the first two characters are uppercase <code>CD</code>, the script retests against the {{para|doi}} value
:*when the first two characters are uppercase <code>CD</code>, the script retests against the {{para|doi}} value but accepts values where the {{para|page(s)}} value is suffixed by <code>.pub{{var|n}}</code> where <code>{{var|n}}</code> is any single digit
:With those simple tests, the script identified 8611 templates that likely are using {{para|page(s)}} when they ought to be using {{para|article-number}}.
:*3604 numbers only ([[Special:Permalink/1286348984#cite_note-247|example]])
:*319 dotted 8-digit numbers ([[Special:Permalink/1283912508#cite_note-morris&austin2012-25|example]])
:*687 alpha-numeric (includes some <code>CD</code> and <code>e</code> prefixes) ([[Special:Permalink/1285269332#cite_note-9|example]])
:*1199 <code>CD</code> prefixes with <code>.pub{{var|n}}</code> suffixes ([[Special:Permalink/1285682554#cite_note-mccartney-270|example]])
:*2802 <code>e</code> prefixes ([[Special:Permalink/1279942230#cite_note-18|example]])
:The quantities mentioned reflect the number of templates with these various characteristics, not the number of articles.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
::8k is small enough that it could be cleared down without any of the things I mentioned. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 11:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::The 8k number is the number of {{em|templates}} found in 25k articles.  {{tlx|cite journal}} is used in approximately [https://templatecount.toolforge.org/index.php?lang=en&namespace=10&name=Cite_journal 1.1 million articles] so we can expect perhaps something like (1,100,000/25,000) * 8,000 = {{formatnum:{{#expr:(1100000/25000) * 8000}}}} articles in the maintenance category.
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 13:19, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have hacked [[Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox]] to implement prospective detection:
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100393 |page=100393}}</syntaxhighlight> – {{para|page(s)}} is five or more digits
:*:{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100393 |page=100393}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD004052|page=CD004052}}</syntaxhighlight> – {{para|page(s)}} is five or more characters
:*:{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD004052|page=CD004052}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1126/sciadv.adl0822 |page=eadl0822}}</syntaxhighlight> – {{para|page(s)}} is five or more characters with <code>e</code> prefix  (case insensitive)
:*:{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1126/sciadv.adl0822 |page=eadl0822}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1098/rsbl.2017.0301|page=20170301}}</syntaxhighlight> – special case: {{para|page(s)}} is exactly eight digits modified by the test to insert a dot between the 4th and 5th digits
:*:{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1098/rsbl.2017.0301|page=20170301}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD005216.pub2|page=CD005216}}</syntaxhighlight> – special case: {{para|page(s)}} has <code>CD</code> prefix (case insensitive) followed by typically six digits modified by the test to append <code>.pub{{var|n}}</code> suffix where <code>{{var|n}}</code> is a single digit
:*:{{cite journal/new |title= Title |journal=Journal |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD005216.pub2|page=CD005216}}
:Needs a better category name; {{color|#085|page}} will most likely be read to mean 'article' which is not the intended meaning.  Suggestions?
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:27, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::Changed category name from 'CS1 maint: page has article number' to 'CS1 maint: article number as page number' which is a smidge better, perhaps?
::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:03, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

== Language tagging of non-English `title=` etc. parmeters generally omitted or forgotten ==

I've just noticed:
* {{Cite journal|last=Börm|first=Henning|date=2013|title=Justinians Triumph und Belisars Erniedrigung. Überlegungen zum Verhältnis zwischen Kaiser und Militär im späten Römischen Reich|url=https://www.academia.edu/5059251|journal=[[Chiron (journal)|Chiron]]|language=de|volume=42|pages=63–91}}
*:The above does not actually tag the HTML element for the {{para|title}} parameter as being in German. This is also the case for analogous parameters (e.g. {{para|chapter}})
* {{Cite book |last=Qiu |first=Xigui |author-link=Qiu Xigui |publisher=The Commercial Press |year=2013 |isbn=978-7-100-09369-9 |edition=2nd |language=zh |script-title=zh:文字学概要 |trans-title=Chinese Writing}}
*: The above does tag the HTML element for the {{para|script-title}} parameter as being in Chinese.  Actually, it language-tags an inner {{tag|bdi}}, e.g.  <syntaxhighlight lang="html"><cite id="CITEREFQiu2013" class="citation book cs1 cs1-prop-script cs1-prop-foreign-lang-source"><a href="/wiki/Qiu_Xigui" title="">Qiu, Xigui</a> (2013).  <bdi lang="zh">文字学概要</bdi> [<i>Chinese Writing</i>] (in Chinese) (2nd&nbsp;ed.). ...</cite></syntaxhighlight>
Broadly, this seems unintentional. This is much of the non-English text on Wikipedia, are there any issues I'm not seeing as to why such HTML elements shouldn't have a {{para|lang}} parameter set? <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 21:02, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:How about {{tlx|cite journal
 | title       = Justinians Triumph und Belisars Erniedrigung. Überlegungen zum Verhältnis zwischen Kaiser und Militär im späten Römischen Reich
 | trans-title = Justinian's Triumph and Belisarius' Humiliation: Reflections on the Relationship between Emperor and Military in the Late Roman Empire
 | last        = Börm
 | first       = Henning
 | date        = 2013
 | url         = https://www.academia.edu/5059251
 | journal     = [[Chiron (journal)|Chiron]]
 | language    = de
 | volume      = 42
 | pages       = 63–91}}
:* {{Cite journal
 | title       = Justinians Triumph und Belisars Erniedrigung. Überlegungen zum Verhältnis zwischen Kaiser und Militär im späten Römischen Reich
 | trans-title = Justinian's Triumph and Belisarius' Humiliation: Reflections on the Relationship between Emperor and Military in the Late Roman Empire
 | last        = Börm
 | first       = Henning
 | date        = 2013
 | url         = https://www.academia.edu/5059251
 | journal     = [[Chiron (journal)|Chiron]]
 | language    = de
 | volume      = 42
 | pages       = 63–91
 }}
: adding {{para|trans-title}}? -- [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 21:48, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
::Nope, neither set {{para|lang}} on any HTML element. FWIW, I have this in my common.css, because I hate myself:
::<syntaxhighlight lang="css">[lang]:not([lang|="en"]) { background-color: rgba(112, 228, 221, 0.15) } </syntaxhighlight> <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 21:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ec}}
:::[[WT:CS1]] does not provide psychiatric services.  You will need to look elsewhere for that sort of help.
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:15, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:{{ec}}
:{{para|language}} identifies the language in which the source is written.  While usually using the same languages, apparently not all source (and other titles) are written using the same language as the source material.  {{para|script-title}} was added so that source titles written using non-Latin script are not improperly italicized and right-to-left source titles are isolated from en.wiki's left-to-right text.  The <code>lang=</code> html attribute is a ancillary benefit because titles from {{para|script-title}} are wrapped with {{tag|bdi}} tags; titles from {{para|title}} are not wrapped in an html tag.
:
:So far as I know, there has been little or no discussion suggesting that {{para|title}}, {{para|chapter}}, etc support language markup.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:15, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
::Does it make sense? I would directly propose this, as it just seems sensical to tag a title that's typically going to be in German as such. Far be it from me to insist if it's going to overcomplicate things though, but if that's not the case it would seem a clear improvement. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 22:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:::The clunky but potentially error-minimal solution could be to bodge {{para|lang-*}} parameters that work like {{para|script-*}} ones.
:::Or, just extend the {{para|script-*}} parameters to support languages written in the Latin script? Apologies if these suggestions sound like hell, but I figured they were worth a shot. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 22:28, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:Which, since I linked it just below, [[Module talk:Citation/CS1/Feature requests#Language]] exists since a long time. I think how the this is done in the wikitext is probably the hindrance to doing it, which includes how much extra gunk ends up there... [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 22:36, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

=== Consecutive parenthetical sidebar ===
(Sidebar: while I'm here again, is it considered ideal to have consecutive parentheticals e.g. {{xt|(in Chinese) (2nd ed.)}}? Would it be overly complicated, confusing or idiosyncratic to render this as something like {{xt|(in Chinese; 2nd ed.)}}? <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 21:06, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:{{ec}}
:Known issue.  Editors haven't expressed much concern about it.  I think I know how to solve it so perhaps I'll look into it.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:15, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
::Good to know, thanks. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 22:18, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
:::A bit more: I laid out some supposed end states at [[Module talk:Citation/CS1/Feature requests#Fix stacked parentheses problem]]. [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 22:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

== [[TM:Cite FTP]] ==

This does not exist but probably should.

FTP is a long story. Prior to 2020/2021, FTP links were available through a browser at ftp:// and it worked thus we had many {{tld|cite web}} with ftp:// URIs. After that, most modern web browsers stopped supporting the FTP protocol, due to security concerns. Some sites have HTTPS gateways so you only needed to change ftp:// to https:// and it works: 

:* ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf
:* https://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf

I did a bot run in 2021, detected when a gateway existed, and converted the URI from ftp:// to https:// 

The '''problem''' is ftp:// links that have no https:// gateway like ftp://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/eph/planets/ .. They are only accessible via a dedicated FTP client eg. the unix ''ftp'' command. These URIs do not work with web browsers, without special and possibly insecure add-ons. There are a couple issues for us:
# Semantically they are not on the web, and thus {{tld|cite web}} is inaccurate
# Web browsers by default do not work and we should not be providing hyperlinks, if nothing else for security reasons.

'''Solution''': We need a FTP template that will display the FTP URI without hyperlinking it. It will document how to access ftp:// links, such as through a user-supplied FTP program. It would also encourage the reader to find an alternative method - a https:// at a different location, or a FTP-https gateway - and encourage replacing the ftp:// with a https:// where possible.

-- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 19:19, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

:FWIW, even if the browser itself can't usually handle FTP nowadays, it can still open another application that supports the scheme. For example, clicking the FTP link on my phone asks me if I want to open it in a file manager app I've installed that supports FTP, which works. So having the clickable link can still be useful sometimes.
:Therefore, what would make sense to me would be to keep the existing link, but also add some kind of note or explanation, perhaps linking to a page with instructions for accessing FTP on various operating systems, as well as recommending first trying SFTP and FTPS in hopes that the server supports either of these secure variants.
:Does FTP have any vulnerabilities beyond those of HTTP without SSL/TLS? What risks could using add-ons realistically pose?
:[[User:Sollyucko|Solomon Ucko]] ([[User talk:Sollyucko|talk]]) 20:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:
:I don't know that {{tlx|cite FTP}} as a native cs1|2 template is something we should do.  You could create a wrapper template around {{tlx|citation}} using [[Module:template wrapper]].  The wrapper would make sure that {{para|url}} has a value using the <code>ftp://</code> scheme (error message if some other scheme); might append the nowiki'd url to the value in {{para|title}} or might force {{para|type|{{color|#d33|FTP}}}} if the link is clickable; might provide a link to the explanatory text that you mentioned.  Such templates might look like this (using {{tld|citation}} as a mockup):
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |link=no}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::{{citation |mode=cs1 |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 <nowiki>ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf</nowiki>|work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory}} – For help viewing <code>[[ftp]]</code> documents see &lt;link>
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |link=yes}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::{{citation |mode=cs1 |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |type=<span style="color:#d33">FTP</span> |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory}} – For help viewing <code>[[ftp]]</code> documents see &lt;link>
:I guess I prefer the second option because it's cleaner and it doesn't hurt to have a live link.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 00:30, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm OK with this proposal. Sadly I don't have the time or experience to make a wrapper template. I would though be able to populate it via bot.    -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 06:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:Why use a separate template? The CS1 templates can have "doi:" at the end, so why treat the FTP address so differently? [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 00:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::Possibly. It could be messy to adapt CS1 to the requirements: special documentation and help pages, gateway vs. non-gateway, display vs. non-display of URIs. I don't think we are talking a ton of URIs either. Mostly the sites are legacy government or university that are too cheap to change and don't care about data security (climate data etc). When I did the conversion bot in 2021 I found tons of old FTP links that no longer work, every year there are fewer. Isolating them to their own template makes it easier to manage the corpus.  -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 06:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@[[User:GreenC|GreenC]], I have started a wrapper template, based on discussion above and several published style guides:[https://www.hendrix.edu/chinaodyssey/chinaodyssey.aspx?id=3157][https://www.unm.edu/~hookster/APA%20Citation%20Style.pdf][https://www.unm.edu/~hookster/Chicago%20Citation%20Style.pdf][https://www.adelaide.edu.au/library/ua/media/4332/library-qrg-harvard-referencing.pdf] No docs yet. It'll do a preview warning and maintenance category with no URL. It works almost just like {{tl|citation}}. It gives CS1 formatting by default. Anything (no, none, nope, n) in the {{para|link}} parameter suppresses it right now. Feel free to change anything that I have wrong in the template; I'm just getting a ball rolling.
:::;Default
::::<code><nowiki>{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}</nowiki></code>
::::{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}
:::;No link
::::<code><nowiki>{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |link=no}}</nowiki></code>
::::{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |link=no}}
:::;With access-date
::::<code><nowiki>{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |access-date=3 May 2025}}</nowiki></code>
::::{{cite FTP |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |work=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |access-date=3 May 2025}}
:::[[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 04:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::This is wonderful [[User:Rjjiii]] very happy with this. Curiously the document "How to Access an FTP Server from the Browser" proceeds to say it can't be done, and to use a dedicated FTP application. We could have an in-house wiki page in the help: namespace. Like [[Help:FTP]] similar to [[Help:Archiving a source]], then link the external "How to" page from there. And link to the Help: page from the template.
::::FTP is in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=insource%3Aftp+insource%3A%2F%5B%5E%5C%2F%5Dftp%3A%5C%2F%5C%2F%2F&title=Special:Search&ns0=1 5,136 pages]. Most are {{tld|cite web}} and have no https interface. I think conversion will be simple: change the name of the template, and change {{para|website}} to {{para|work}}. [[User:Trappist the monk]], is that a reasonable plan, are there any other parameters cite web has citation does not? -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 06:18, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I've come to believe that the {{para|link}} parameter should not be supported.  A convenient link is far superior to an unlinked string of url gibberish – cs1|2 had a reason for linking {{para|title}} with {{para|url}}: this is an electronic encyclopedia; all of those published style guides are for works that have physical form.  So, I see no reason for {{tlx|cite FTP}} to exclude {{para|url}}, {{para|url-access}}, {{para|url-status}}, {{para|archive-url}}, {{para|archive-format}}, and {{para|access-date}} or, frankly, any of the other parameters that are currently excluded: {{para|chapter-url}}, {{para|contribution-url}}, {{para|section-url}}, {{para|article-url}}, {{para|entry-url}}, {{para|map-url}}, {{para|section-url}} – {{tlx|citation}} does not support {{para|map-url}} or its companion {{para|map}}.  The other excluded url-holding parameters also have companion 'title-holding' parameters.  If we are to exclude all of these url-holding parameters, ought we not exclude their companions?  Further, placing the ftp url at the end of the rendered citation prevents it from being included in the citation's metadata.
:::::
:::::Since {{para|link}} should go away, I see no reason why {{tlx|cite web}} cannot underlie {{tld|cite FTP}}.
:::::
:::::{{tld|cite FTP}} {{em|must not}} provide free advertising for some company's product in en.wiki articles as its current incarnation will do.
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::I linked instead to [[Comparison of FTP client software]], no strong preference on link target. Regarding {{para|archive-url}}, I didn't realize until this discussion that [[Archive.org]] saves FTP links. [[Archive.today]] just gives an "Invalid URL: ftp://..." message. An archive link like, https://web.archive.org/web/20220121090419/ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf, is probably accessible to a much broader range of users. If the plan is to have a bot convert these to an FTP template, could the bot also check for archives? No strong on opinions on other notes above, [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 16:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Archive.org saves FTP links when they have an HTTPS interface/gateway. It's saving the https version of the link but displaying the URI as if it were ftp:// .. if the URI has no interface then archive providers can't save it. Ideally any ftp:// that has a gateway, we modify the URI to https:// but no guarantee Archive.org saved the URI as https:// they may have it saved the URI ftp:// even though it's actually through a https:// interface. Confusing. The purpose/need for Cite FTP template is to support ftp:// links that do ''not'' have an interface gateway, that are pure 100% FTP protocol and nothing else, no hybrid link. Those hybrids, we simply convert the URI to https:// and the FTP problem disappears, they can continue to use cite web. -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 18:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::What template is link a parameter of? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::The [[Special:Permalink/1288674866|current incarnation]] of {{tlx|cite FTP}}; see the above examples, in particular: '''No link'''.
:::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 16:17, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Is this a wrapper for {{tl|Citation}} or something else, such as {{tl|Cite book}}? If the former, sometimes Citation doesn't guess correctly whether the publication being cited is a book, journal, etc. Is there a way to specify what kind of publication is being cited? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 15:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::In its current form, wrapping {{tlx|citation}}, {{tlx|cite FTP}} will require some sort of parameter ({{para|server}}?) to feed {{para|work}} so that {{tld|citation}} renders {{para|title}} upright and quoted.  If that parameter is not present, {{para|title}} will be rendered in italics.
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Trappist, would you be willing to modify or make a template that conforms to what you envision? As noted above, this template is primarily for FTP links that are pure 100% FTP protocol, that do not redirect to a HTTPS server via an interface/gateway. These types of "pure" FTP links will never work in a browser, without special modifications and software installed. For the vast majority of users they will get page not found. Of course this won't stop editors from adding interface FTP links that do work in browsers, thus the need for turning on or off the hyperlink, but in those cases I can't think of any reason why they would use Cite FTP and not Cite web, simply change the URI from ftp:// to https://  -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 18:29, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::See {{tlx|cite FTP/sandbox}}.  Using the same example as above:
:::::::*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::::::*:{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}
:::::::The obvious difference here is that {{para|title}} is linked and the template uses {{para|server}} instead of {{para|work}}.  Another difference:
:::::::*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=http://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::::::*:{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=http://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf}}
:::::::The template emits an error message when {{para|url}} holds sommat other than an ftp url; category applies only to mainspace.  {{para|server}} isn't currently required but probably ought to be.  There is no preview message.
:::::::
:::::::Earlier in this discussion it was suggested that a help page should be linked from this template.  At this writing, both the live and sandbox versions of the template link to [[Comparison of FTP client software]] which to my mind does not answer.  The help text can be on a separate page in the Help namespace or can be included in the template documentation.  I guess the latter would be my preference.  I leave it to others to write that help text.
:::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::[[User:Trappist the monk]]: This is fine, thank you. I agree the help page should be in Help: namespace, so editors can create custom instructions, and link to relevant pages internal and external. As noted by [[User:Jc3s5h]] below, the example FTP link is actually a dead FTP site. How do we handle those? Adding a {{tlx|dead link}} won't do anything with bots, nor will adding an {{para|archive-url}}, because the [[web archive]] providers (Wayback Machine, Archive.today etc) only work with web archives, not FTP. Perhaps the Help: page can have a section on this (searching for alternatives), though I'd still like some way to indicate the FTP site is inoperable. Any thoughts? Possibly a new version of {{tld|dead link}} such as {{tld|dead FTP}} which can be tracked separately.  -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 18:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::I would much rather have a help page about ftp access rather than an article about ftp clients, because we can give practical advice without finding "reliable sources". Many users will be using Windows 11, and most of the information about ftp in Windows 11 is in question-and-answer forums rather than Microsoft documentation, or other reliable sources that could be cited in an article. My recommendation for the Windows 11 user who doesn't want to bother installing a special client is use Windows Explorer. For simple cases, just put the URL in the address bar of Windows Explorer. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 20:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::
:::::::::I have tweaked the ~/sandbox version so that it ignores {{para|archive-date}}, {{para|archivedate}}, {{para|archive-url}}, {{para|archiveurl}} and {{para|url-status}}.  These parameters can be set so when a dead ftp is encountered, editors can set {{para|url-status|dead}} ({{tlx|cite FTP/sandbox}} is a wrapper template so the cs1|2 rules can be bent).  There is no visible indication but perhaps better than an unattached {{tlx|dead link}} template and perhaps bots can use it.  Also changed ~/sandbox to link to [[Help:FTP]]:
::::::::::*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |url-status=dead}}</syntaxhighlight>
::::::::::*:{{cite FTP/sandbox |author=W. M. Folkner |author2=E. M. Standish |author3=J. G. Williams |author4=D. H. Boggs |date=2 August 2007 |title=Planetary and lunar ephemeris DE418 |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/generic_kernels/spk/planets/a_old_versions/de418_announcement.pdf |url-status=dead}}
:::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::Great. If url-status is set, is it possible to produce a visual notice like {{dead link}} except "dead FTP link"? -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 16:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yeah, see the example above.  Can be linked; if so, where?  Mayhaps we should change the parameter to {{para|ftp-status|dead}}?
:::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] that's perfect. I guess leave unlinked until something better comes along. According to [[URL]] anything with protocol://example.com is a URL/URI while something like "example.com" is not a URL but would be a URI. If we were concerned about using "url-status" there would also be concern with {{para|url}} .. however technically URL is correct. Suggest leave as url.  -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 14:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::ok.  I've added categorization for dead ftp links and tweaked the category names to: {{cl|Articles using cite FTP with improper URL}} and {{cl|Articles with dead FTP links}}. Categories created.  Live template updated.  Documentation tweaked.  I'll write an AWB script today that will convert {{tlx|cite web}} with {{para|url|ftp://...}} to {{tlx|cite FTP}}.
:::::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 16:01, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::OK. Conversion is more complex. Need to check each ftp:// and see if it has an HTTPS gateway available and if so convert the url to https:// which is preferable to retain the cite web. Make sure the https:// link works. If no gateway, then covert to {{tld|cite FTP}} and run a FTP client (ncftpget) to verify the link is operational, updating ftp-status accordingly. Feel free to do this if you want, I was going to repurpose some code I wrote in 2021. -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 20:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::Oh, ok, you do that.  I was just going to do a simple convert.  Your way would be much better.  Don't forget to change {{para|publisher}}, {{para|website}}, {{para|work}} to {{para|server}}.
:::::::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 21:33, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
:Does the ftp service on naif.jpl.nasa.gov actually work? I cannot connect to it. Is this example from a real Wikipedia article? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 23:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::Here is a working example, in the sense that the FTP server exists, and the file exists:
::*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite FTP/sandbox |last1=Standish |first1=Myles |date=October 31, 1997 |title=CDroms |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/eph/planets/}}</syntaxhighlight>
::*{{cite FTP/sandbox |last1=Standish |first1=Myles |date=October 31, 1997 |title=CDroms |server=Jet Propulsion Laboratory |url=ftp://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/eph/planets/CDROM.notes}}
::[[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 23:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I have edited [[Help:FTP]] so the example works. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 14:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Why a cite ftp template, and not just url protocol recognition? &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 18:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
::What do you mean by {{tq|url protocol recognition}}?  {{tlx|cite web}} recognizes that {{para|url}} has a url with an <code>ftp://</code> scheme?  Then what?
::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
:::that any of {{tl|cite xxx}} recognizes the FTP scheme. If there's a journal article hosted on an FTP, the right template to use would still be {{tlx|cite journal|url{{=}}ftp://...}}. Same for a book chapter hosted on an ftp, {{tlx|cite book|chapter-url{{=}}ftp://...}}, and so on. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 19:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
::::That was brought up further up, my response began: "Possibly. It could be messy.." In brief this is cleaner and easier to manage. I don't think the quantity and quality of links, and future of FTP, warrants integration. Looking at the links, it's over 50% NOAA. Which is currently being massively defunded. Throughout the federal government there are big changes afoot with computer systems, headed by DOGE ie. Musk's Silicon Valley wrecking crew, for technical reasons alone it's reasonable to assume they are going to deprecate FTP in line with the browser companies. There will always be some small number of holdouts. -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 20:21, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

==Unclear guidance about capitalization in titles (whatever a title is)==
{{ping|Gadget850}} on 13 October 2011 you [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:Citation_Style_1&diff=next&oldid=455390263 added], to the "Titles and chapters" section, the sentence
{{quote|Should consistently use title case or sentence case throughout the article.}}
The first entry in the talk page archives is from December 2011, so I'm unable to find any discussion about it.

A version of this guidance has remained in this help page right up to the present, even after the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help%3ACitation_Style_1&diff=1288080741&oldid=1285680905 edit] at 09:02, 30 April 2025 UTC by [[User:Beland|Beland]]; the recent version reads
{{quote|Use either title case or sentence case consistently throughout the article.}}

There is discussion going on at [[WT:CITE#RFC on consistent styles and capitalization of titles]]. My understanding of the status quo before this RFC began was that title case was used in the body of articles, but citations could use any consistent style. CS1 is a style, and if there was consensus, could choose a specific style.

I think the current guidance in this help page is confusing. Does it mean there are two, and only two options:
#Title case, no matter whether citing a book, journal article, or magazine article
#Sentence case, no matter whether citing a book, journal article, or magazine article
Or does it mean that title case can be used for some citations, and sentence case for others, so long as the criteria for deciding which to use is consistent throughout the article? The criteria might be what is commonly used in many printed style manuals: major works like books use title case; smaller works like journal articles, chapters of books, and pamphlets use sentence case. I think this last interpretation is likely to be adopted by many editors because that's what they're used to when they read or write outside Wikipedia.

Another question is whether it is legitimate for this help page to adopt a different capitalization style that the "[[WP:MOS|Manual of Style]]". [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:Don't expect a reply from Editor [[User:Gadget850|Gadget850]] who retired nearly a decade ago.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 17:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:Regardless of MOS nonsense, what I use is sentence case for "article/chapter/etc..." level, and title case for "journal/magazine/book title/work" level. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 17:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:If that RFC is resolved in favor of "no", then the guidance here that says the capitalization should depend on the topic of the ''source'' should be removed in favor of the text asserting ''article'' consistency. If it is resolved "yes" than the text specifying ''article'' consistency should be removed.
:I agree the guidance on title vs. sentence case needs to be clarified. [[Chicago style]] uses title case for all works, which aligns with Wikipedia article prose per [[MOS:TITLECAPS]]. [[MOS:MINORWORK]] instead distinguishes minor works by using quote marks and major works by using italics, not by capitalization differences. [[APA style]] uses title case for major works and sentence case for minor works.
:The page says CS1 is based on both Chicago and APA, so perhaps it's designed to be agnostic as to capitalization so the templates can be used by editors preferring either. Chicago style is your option 1. I don't know of any popular style guide that uses option 2. Given all that, if the RFC is resolved to "no", I think it would generate minimal objection if clarify with something like:
::Per [[WP:CITEVAR]], articles may choose any popular citation style, as long as it is used consistently throughout the article.
::* Choose title case or sentence case for each title based on the third-party citation rules. Some styles (like Chicago style) use [[title case]] for all titles, as does Wikipedia article prose. Some styles (like APA style) use title case for major works and [[sentence case]] for minor works. 
::* Where the third-party style says to use title case, follow the rules at [[MOS:TITLECAPS]] regardless of the third-party title case rules.
::* Some styles (such as Bluebook) use small caps for some titles. These styles are not compatible with CS1 templates because {{tl|sc1}} (required for citations by [[MOS:SMALLCAPS]]) produces [[Wikipedia:COinS|COinS pollution]].
:I'm not sure if we should add:
::* For styles that apply different formatting to major and minor works, classify works based on [[MOS:MINORWORKS]] regardless of the third-party classification rules.
:To help automate consistency, it would be feasible to have the CS1 templates upcase from sentence to title case automatically, e.g. if a page declares "mode=chicago" or "mode=titlecase" or something. (We already have "mode=cs2" for punctuation.) Downcasing from title case to sentence case or from all caps to title case needs human intervention in order to handle proper nouns correctly.
:It make make sense to put this guidance on [[Wikipedia:Citing sources]] and link to it from the help page, assuming it is affirmed as current consensus with a discussion. Then it will be treated as a guideline that should be followed (and hopefully avoid disputes) rather than a how-to that can be ignored. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 21:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
::CS1 templates and modules should never modify the case of any of its arguments. -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 03:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I agree with that. Some BibTeX styles do that (in the easier direction from title case to sentence case) and it is a pain and a half fixing all the citations to specially mark the proper nouns and mathematical notation so that they don't break them. Many authors don't take the care to do that and end up with published papers with bad autocasing in the references. I imagine it would be much worse for a style that that attempted to autocase in the other direction. We don't need both the bad autocasing and the extra work blocking the autocasing here too. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 05:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Err...I would ''expect'' title to sentence case to be error-prone, because proper nouns can get improperly downcased. It might be easier for a human to convert to sentence case because of all the picky rules about which words get capitalized, but a few picky rules are massively easier for a script to implement than reliable proper noun detection.
::::I was having trouble thinking of an example where going from sentence case to title case could cause an error, and math expressions are definitely that, so well spotted! Maybe that's a feature we shouldn't build then, or maybe it should be turned off for math articles or for specific citations with an "autocap=off" flag or something. (Having to mark each proper noun sounds egregious.) If it's a feature that has to be intentionally turned on for a specific article, that could still save a lot of time, and presumably people wouldn't turn in on for math articles.
::::I suppose we do have to balance the work of futzing with auto-casing against the work of making millions of edits to make citations have title case consistent with their respective host articles. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 09:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
* [[Wikipedia:User_scripts/Requests#Title_Case_Convertor]] -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 06:54, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

== Lua error? ==

Could somebody please take a look at [[Bernard Schwartz House]].  A large number of the references are showing up with {{tq|Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index a boolean value}} and I don't have a clue where to even begin debugging that. [[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] [[User Talk:RoySmith|(talk)]] 21:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:Transient error.  Sometimes MediaWiki commons refuses to cooperate.  If you are still seeing the the errors, null edit.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 21:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:
:I've tweaked the id limits fetch code in the sandbox to see if we can avoid these sorts of errors.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 21:56, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:
:And this just in...  The link to the tabular data, [[c:Data:CS1/Identifier limits.tab]] for non-machine access, may be working again though not, apparently, as the result of [[Phab:T389105]] which, at this writing, is still described as 'Open, Needs Triage'.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:03, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

== Is there a reason Template:CS1 language sources uses Module:Cs1 documentation support/sandbox? ==

Looking into supporting {{tl|CS1 language sources}} categories for [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 84]], I found that {{tl|CS1 language sources/core}} invokes a function from [[Module:Cs1 documentation support/sandbox]] rather than [[Module:Cs1 documentation support]]. Is there a reason the sandbox hasn't been synced to the main module and the template updated to use it instead of the sandbox? If not, I'll probably go ahead and do that. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 02:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:That comes from [[Special:Diff/1258006897|this edit]] 17 November 2024.  Editor [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]]?
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 02:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
::No idea why I left it like this. If there are no issues you see with it, I can sync with the live verison. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 18:20, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

== Citation templates script-title ==

For the various {{tl|citation}}/cite templates, could we make it so that <code>script-title</code> is an adequate replacement for "<code>title</code>"? When referencing a non-English source, to my understanding it's more appropriate to use <code>script-title</code> and not <code>title</code>, but when doing so I get a warning message in VisualEditor that tells me that <code>title</code> is required. [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 14:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:This is not a failing of cs1|2.  But, it is yet another failing of visual editor and templatedata.  All cs1|2 templates accept {{para|script-title}} regardless of the presence or absence of {{para|title}}.  If you believe differently, please give a real example of such failing.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::I had suspected it was a problem of visual editor and template data. Is it possible to fix/work around? To my knowledge it isn't. [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 19:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:In these cases, besides putting the original title in {{para|script-title}}, it is often useful to put a romanization of the title in {{para|title}}. [[User talk:Kanguole|Kanguole]] 19:51, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::Imo romanizations of titles are often excessively long and useful to few (difficult to read). Instead, I use {{para|trans-title}}. But if you use that param instead of title it still triggers the warning in VisualEditor. [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 19:57, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I typically use all three, but it is true that Chinese and Japanese romanizations are more useful than Korean ones. But the reference list is out of the flow of the article text, so space is not at a premium. [[User talk:Kanguole|Kanguole]] 20:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I'll still respectfully withhold from using it though; it's an extremely rare practice for Korea-related articles on enwiki. I've basically never seen it done. [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 20:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

== Trans-series? ==

It has already been suggested in an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_30#Edit_request:_|script-series_and_|trans-series edit request], but would it be useful to add a translated version of the paramater series; trans-series? Similar to title and chapter. I have a series of books ("Parlementaire geschiedenis van Nederland na 1945"), and it would be helpful for English readers to know what this series is about. [[User:Dajasj|Dajasj]] ([[User talk:Dajasj|talk]]) 08:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

== Parameters for English translations of foreign sources? ==

When citing an English translation, how do you indicate the original language, title and chapter title? The documentation for {{tl|citation}} seems to suggest that the obvious parameters are only for use when citing in the original language. -- [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 12:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
:I would refer to a separate {{tl|citation}} for the original work after the translation. [[User talk:Kanguole|Kanguole]] 21:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
::What if all I have is the translation? -- [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 14:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
:
:For {{tlx|Cite book}}, if you want to indicate the original title there is {{para|trans-title}} and {{para|trans-chapter}}, or the original publication date {{para|orig-date}} or year {{para|orig-year}}. The translator is {{para|translator-last}} and {{para|translator-first}}. Usually these (trans-* and orig-*) are sufficient. There is no {{para|orig-lang}} option, don't know why. -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 00:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
::That's what I would assume given only the names of the parameters, but the documentation says things like {{tqq|'''trans-title''': If the cited source is in a foreign language,}}. In the case I'm concerned with, the cited source is the translation. Thus, for this<ref>{{cite book
 | edition          = 2nd
 | script-title     = he:פִּרְקֵי אָבוֹת
 | title            = Sayings of the Jewish Fathers - comprising - Pirqe Aboth - in Hebrew and English - with Notes and Excursuses
 | translator       = Charles Taylor 
 | translator-link  = Charles Taylor (Hebraist)
 | url              = https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/sjf/
 | year             = 1897
 | access-date      = May 8, 2025
 | publisher        = [[Cambridge University Press]]
 }}
</ref> citation, {{para|title|פִּרְקֵי אָבוֹת}} and {{para|trans-title|Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (Pirqe Aboth)}} would imply that I was citing the original rather than the translation, as would {{para|script-title|פִּרְקֵי אָבוֹת}} and {{para|trans-title|Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (Pirqe Aboth)}}. There's also the problem that the English title is not actually a translation of the original Hebrew. -- [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 14:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
:::The [[Template:Cite_book#csdoc_trans-title|documentation]] for {{para|trans-title}} says (in part):
::::'''trans-title''': English translation of the title if the source cited is in a foreign language.
:::If you are citing the source at sacred-texts.com, do not include {{para|script-title|he:פִּרְקֵי אָבוֹת}} because that text does not appear to be present in that source.  Do not shoehorn multiple sources into a single cs1|2 template; the templates are designed (if we can use that term) to support only one source at a time.
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
<!-- Keep after last sig. -->
{{reflist-talk}}


[[Template:Cite book#csdoc_trans_title]]

== "[[:Module:Citation]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Module:Citation&redirect=no Module:Citation]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''[[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 14#Module:Citation]]''' until a consensus is reached. [[User:Rusalkii|<span style="color:#1C7E85"><b>Rusalkii</b></span>]] ([[User talk:Rusalkii|talk]]) 22:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

== ignored parameters not ignored ==

I recently found this template:
:<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite SSRN |first1=Amanda |last1=Glazer |first2=Jacob |last2=Spertus |orig-date=8 March 2020 |date=2020-02-10 |df=dmy-all |title=Start spreading the news: New York's post-election audit has major flaws |ssrn=3536011}}</syntaxhighlight>
::{{cite SSRN |first1=Amanda |last1=Glazer |first2=Jacob |last2=Spertus |orig-date=8 March 2020 |date=2020-02-10 |df=dmy-all |title=Start spreading the news: New York's post-election audit has major flaws |ssrn=3536011}}
The error message says that {{para|orig-date}} should be ignored yet there it is in the rendering.

[[Module:Citation]] gets parameters from the parent frame's <code>args</code> table.  Though this table cannot be modified, the code attempted to modify it by setting the value assigned <syntaxhighlight lang="lua" inline="1">args['orig-date'] = ''</syntaxhighlight>.  Fixed in the sandbox:
:<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite SSRN/new |first1=Amanda |last1=Glazer |first2=Jacob |last2=Spertus |orig-date=8 March 2020 |date=2020-02-10 |df=dmy-all |title=Start spreading the news: New York's post-election audit has major flaws |ssrn=3536011}}</syntaxhighlight>
::{{cite SSRN/new |first1=Amanda |last1=Glazer |first2=Jacob |last2=Spertus |orig-date=8 March 2020 |date=2020-02-10 |df=dmy-all |title=Start spreading the news: New York's post-election audit has major flaws |ssrn=3536011}}
—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

== 3-digit year makes error ==

*<nowiki>{{cite book|title=title|date=Jan 500}}</nowiki>
*{{cite book|title=title|date=Jan 500}}
*<nowiki>{{cite book|title=title|date=Jan 0500}}</nowiki>
*{{cite book|title=title|date=Jan 0500}}
The former will result in an error, but the latter will not. This doesn't seem to comply with [[MOS:BADDATE]], but is this intentional? What is the meaning of difference between (%d%d%d%d) and (%d%d%d%d?) in patterns_t of [[Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation|/Date validation]]? --[[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 02:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:It is intentional. Please cite the version that you are actually looking at. The assumption in the code is that you are not citing an actual physical book that was created in AD 500. You can use {{para|orig-year|500}} for the original publication date. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 15:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:
:I thought that I had replied to this... Alas, it appears not.
:
:Is it even possible to know the publication date to month precision, for such an old publication?  Regardless, the leading zero version ({{para|date|Jan 0500}}) above should also emit an error message.  Further, is there any reason why a leading zero should be allowed in the year portion of a publication date?
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Since I'm only localizing it for jawiki, the specifications can be decided by the people at enwiki. Now Mdy, dMy, y-y and y allow 3-digits year, and the others (ymd, Md-dy, d-dMy, dM-dMy, Md-Mdy, dMy-dMy, Mdy-Mdy, My-My, M-My, My, Sy4-y2, Sy-y, y4-y2) don't. All allow leading zero version. --[[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 15:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::The conformance (and lack thereof) of the citation templates to [[WP:MOSNUM]] is documented at [[Help:Citation Style 1#Date format compliance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style]]. I contend we should follow the wisdom of [[Fred Brooks]] who in his book ''[[The Mythical Man-Month]]'' that the designers of [[OS/360 and successors|OS/360]] learned the hard way, it is essential that the behavior of software match its documentation.
::A fault with the documentation is that it fails to explain what an exception to compliance is. Is it
::*The template renders a falsehood?
::*The template ignores the parameter?
::*The template renders a true result together with an error message?
::So I added the following sentence to "Citation Style 1"
::{{quote|When the template displays an error message (to a reader who has not chosen enhanced errors or warnings) for a value that complies with {{section link|Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers|Dates, months, and years}} the template is considered non-compliant for that value.}}
::Of course this will either require changing the table to show values that produce error messages, or changing my sentence to indicate that a correct rendered value along with an error message is compliant. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|Jonesey95}} The code should follow the documentation, or at least provide a truthful escape hatch. The [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Dates, months, and years|documentation]] says three digit years are allowed. Unfortunately, the documentation isn't limited to citations, and of course there is a need to use three digit years in the running text of articles. I suggest some sort of escape hatch be provided, such as {{para|date|((May 950))}}. It is wrong to use {{para|orig-year}} if one actually read the original, or a scan of the original available from a reliable source, such as [[Oxford University]]. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Trappist the Monk: [[WP:MOSNUM]] specifically includes {{!xt|June 0622}} in the unacceptable date formats table.
::Question for Trappist or others: Where can we add these or similar examples to the test cases? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Historically, cs1|2 documentation lags the code.  The documentation is not protected.  If you see where and how the documentation can be improved, please do so.  A good place to start might be to confirm that {{slink|Help:Citation_Style_1|Date format compliance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style}} correctly lists compliance with and exceptions to [[MOS:DATE]].  For example, the Acceptable date formats table identifies '2 Sep' and 'Sep 2' (dates without years) as acceptable but cs1|2 will reject those sorts of dates though the Date format compliance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style does not say so.
:::
:::Date-handling testcases are defined at [[Module:Citation/CS1/testcases/dates]] with the results rendered at [[Module talk:Citation/CS1/testcases/dates]].
:::
:::Thanks for the {{!xt|June 0622}} pointer; I'll fix the module to reject zero-padded years.
:::
:::Still unanswered is my question about three-digit-year publication dates with month or month-day precision.  It is pointed out above that we are somewhat inconsistent in our support of three-digit years.  Should we really be supporting such dates?
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Advanced searches of Wikipedia are not my strong suit; when I've tried to use Advanced search in [[Special:Search]] the finds and misses often mystified me. Can anyone suggest how to search for pages that cite works from the 1st millennium? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 19:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Here are three searches:
::::::{{para|year|###}} – times out; finds [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+book%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B+*%5BCc%5Dite+book%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C+*year+*%3D+*%5B0-9%5D%7B3%7D+*%5B%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2&ns0=1 ~100] articles
::::::{{para|date|###}} – times out; finds [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+book%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B+*%5BCc%5Dite+book%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C+*date+*%3D+*%5B0-9%5D%7B3%7D+*%5B%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2F&ns0=1 ~70] articles
::::::{{para|date|mmmmm ###}} – times out; finds [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=hastemplate%3A%22Cite+book%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B+*%5BCc%5Dite+book%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C+*date+*%3D+*%5BJFMASONDa-z%5D%2B+%5B0-9%5D%7B3%7D+*%5B%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2F&ns0=1 no] articles
:::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 19:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Sandbox now rejects zero-padded year values:
:::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new|title=title|date=0500}}</syntaxhighlight> → {{cite book/new|title=title|date=0500}}
:::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new|title=title|date=Jan 0500}}</syntaxhighlight> → {{cite book/new|title=title|date=Jan 0500}}
::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 19:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::In check_date(), only year2 is checked by is_valid_year() for My-My and y-y, so
:::::*{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=Jan 0999 – Jan 1000}}
:::::*{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=0999–1000}}
:::::I think good way is to use [1-9]%d%d%d? in patterns_t except ymd.
:::::--[[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 02:40, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::FlatLanguage, is it your intent to not support three digit years, or would those be handled somewhere else? [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 15:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@Jc3s5h: I don't understand the meaning of your question. Trappist the monk fixed sandbox of the module to make 0YYY error, but I pointed out it overlook 0YYY–YYYY.
:::::::Now the module use pattern %d%d%d%d or %d%d%d%d? and what I suggested was [1-9]%d%d%d?. %d means digit, [1-9] means 1 to 9 digit, and '?' means that the previous character is optional. So [1-9]%d%d%d? means 3 or 4 digits led by a non-zero number. [[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 01:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Thanks, I was expecting the first digit to be optional, but it's the last digit that's optional, which gives the same result. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 14:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

== date: 2000-10-01, year: 2010 doesn't make error ==

*<nowiki>{{cite book|title=title|date=1 Oct 2000|year=2010}}</nowiki>
*{{cite book|title=title|date=1 Oct 2000|year=2010}}
*<nowiki>{{cite book|title=title|date=2000-10-01|year=2010}}</nowiki>
*{{cite book|title=title|date=2000-10-01|year=2010}}
A part of <code>year_date_check()</code> in [[Module:Citation/CS1/Date_validation|/Date_validation]] is folowing:
<syntaxhighlight lang="lua">
	if date_string:match ('%d%d%d%d%-%d%d%-%d%d') and year_string:match ('%d%d%d%d%a') then	--special case where both date and year are required YYYY-MM-DD and YYYYx
		date1 = date_string:match ('(%d%d%d%d)');
		year = year_string:match ('(%d%d%d%d)');
		if year ~= date1 then
			result = 0;															-- years don't match
		else
			result = 2;															-- years match; but because disambiguated, don't add to maint cat
		end
</syntaxhighlight>
It should be fixed like following:
<syntaxhighlight lang="lua">
	if date_string:match ('%d%d%d%d%-%d%d%-%d%d') then	--special case where both date and year are required YYYY-MM-DD and YYYYx
		date1 = date_string:match ('(%d%d%d%d)');
		year = year_string:match ('(%d%d%d%d)');
		if year ~= date1 then
			result = 0;															-- years don't match
		elseif year_string:match ('%d%d%d%d%a')
			result = 2;															-- years match; but because disambiguated, don't add to maint cat
		end
</syntaxhighlight>
Or, exclude YYYY-MM-DD at later branch of YYYY-YY. --[[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 02:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:Or, much easier, flag as an error a citation that attempts to use both {{para|date}} ''and'' {{para|year}}. [[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 09:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::Isn't that [[:Category:CS1 maint: date and year]]? [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 12:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, the problem I pointed out is that the latter should be err_bad_date, not  maint_date_and_year. Now 2000-10-01 is parsed as 2000–2010 in year_date_check(). --[[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 13:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::As I recall, when citing two works by the same author in the same year, and at least one of the works had a date more precise than the year, it was necessary to cite the date as, for example, {{para|date|January 18, 2015}} {{para|year|2015b}}. Now, the "b" could be added to the date parameter, {{para|date|January 18, 2015b}}, but that wasn't always the case. If the publication dates were all-numeric format, one solution would be to write {para|date|2015-01-18}} {{para|year|2015b}}. It wouldn't work to use {{para|date|2015b-01-18}}. (My solution would be to change every all-numeric date in all the citations to a format with a spelled-out month since ISO 8601 is not really suitable for Wikipedia articles.) [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 14:41, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::ISO dates are fine for the vast majority of articles. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 19:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:The YYYY–YY test in the live module isn't correctly bounded.  Because of that, the the test extracts the YYYY-MM portion of {{para|date|2000-10-01}} believing it to be an abbreviated year range YYYY–YY (2000–10).  The test constructs a 4-digit year from the century digits from 2000 (20) and the MM digits (10) of what it thought was the abbreviated year to make YYMM → 2010.  Because 2010 from 2010-10-01 matches the constructed value (2010), the test emits the maintenance message instead of the error message.  Fixed in the sandbox by properly bounding the YYYY–YY pattern ([[Special:Permalink/1290913475#L-823|line 823 (permalink)]]): 
<div style="margin-left:3.2em">{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=2000-10-01|year=2000}}
{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=2000-10-01|year=2010}}
{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=2000-10-01|year=2010a}}</div>
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 22:15, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Now Sy4-y2 recognized incorrectly:
::{{cite compare |template=book|title=title|date=Winter 2000–01|year=2001}}
::I think a good way is to handle all of the YYYY-MM-DD in the first branch, as I indicated at the beginning. [[User:FlatLanguage|FlatLanguage]] ([[User talk:FlatLanguage|talk]]) 02:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

== trans-title is not included in the link ==

[[Template:Cite web#Title]] says: "trans-title is included in the link". I interpret this to mean that the value of the parameter is clickable but it's not as seen at [[Template:Cite web#Foreign language and translated title]]. Is the documentation wrong or did I misunderstand something? I don't  think it ''should'' be clickable. I'm just commenting on the documentation. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 14:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:The decision to exclude {{para|title-link}} from the {{para|title}} external link was taken at {{slink|Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_30#Stop_linking_trans-title}}.  The documentation was never updated.  Done now.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 15:56, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

==Bloat==
Citation templates are great tools for editors, but they do create massive bloat that accretes to real harm. In an article like [[hip-hop]], converting just one Cite Journal reference to plain text saved 360 bytes. The entire article is 226,834 bytes. An enormous amount of its current bloat is a reliance on templates for citations where they are not necessary. If there were a way to get templates to generate more efficient citations, that would be a blessing.[[User:Trumpetrep|Trumpetrep]] ([[User talk:Trumpetrep|talk]]) 21:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)