View source for Module: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}}

== doi-access ==

I added a doi to a book reference, and got a CS1 warning: "Category:CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI". The only valid value of {{para|doi-access}} is "free", so what is the point? [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 18:49, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

:I think the idea is that {{para|doi-access}} is optional. For some reason I don't understand, we assume that {{para|url}} is free access unless otherwise stated, while {{para|doi}} is limited access by default. If you leave {{para|doi-access}} blank, you're effectively saying that the DOI link is limited access. ''[[User:UndercoverClassicist|<b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b>]]'' <sup>[[User talk:UndercoverClassicist|T]]·[[Special:Contributions/UndercoverClassicist|C]]</sup> 07:38, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
::But if omitting it is acceptable, why put out an error message? If it is assumed to be free by default, why do I need to add {{para|doi-access|free}}? [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 17:47, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
:::{{color|#085|Maintenance messages}} are not {{color|#bf3c2c|error messages}}.
:::
:::In {{tlx|cite journal}} templates, a free-to-read {{para|doi}} can autolink {{para|title}} but only when {{para|doi-access|free}}.  {{para|doi-access|free}} also controls display of the free-to-read lock icon ([[File:Lock-green.svg|9px]]); no {{para|doi-access|free}}, no lock icon attached to the citation's {{para|doi}} rendering.  In other cs1|2 templates, a free-to-read {{para|doi}} does not autolink {{para|title}} so the free-to-read icon aids interested readers by identifying free-to-read {{para|doi}} links.
:::
:::cs1|2 maintains a list of doi prefixes that are known to be generally free-to-read – the prefix is the several digits between the <code>10.</code> and the <code>/</code>.  Alas, not all dois believed to be free-to-read are actually free-to-read.  For example <code>10.1155/S1073792801000046</code> has the prefix <code>1155</code> which is generally free-to-read but, in this case is not.
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:31, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
::::"not all dois believed to be free-to-read are actually free-to-read". It fairly often happens when clicking a "doi-access=free" link that the related web page displays possibly an abstract, and possibly allows downloading something that isn't the paper referenced. Presumably an error by an editor, unless the parameter is inserted via the list of prefixes. [[User:Pol098|Pol098]] ([[User talk:Pol098|talk]]) 16:35, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::Re {{xt|Alas, not all dois believed to be free-to-read are actually free-to-read}}. This affects one journal prior to 2007, ''[[International Mathematics Research Notices]]'', as detailed in [[Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 94#Unflagged free DOI, add a time component to some DOIs]]. It's a longstanding issue, detailed in [[:Category:CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI]], an affects 35 articles, and I would ''love'' for ISSN prefixes prior to 2007, or at least to IMRN, to be ignored by the template. &#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> 03:55, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
::::::Are these 35 of the (at the moment) 40 articles in the category?  [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 12:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Yes &#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> 16:56, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
::::Annoyingly, doi-access= doesn't support limited or subscription. Bug, I think. When I try it, I get "Invalid <code>|doi-access=subscription</code> ([[Help:CS1 errors#invalid param val|help]]), but the help is not helpful.  I see that free is the only allowed setting for doi-access, but '''why is that'''? It seems to be in direct conflict with [[WP:CS1]], which states, <q>As a courtesy to readers and other editors, editors should signal restrictions on access to material provided via the external links included in a citation.</q> And I agree with that statement/policy. But I'm being blocked from doing so. WT?
::::Also, it says at [[Help:Citation Style 1#Registration or subscription required]] that "[[:Category:CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI]], is routinely cleared by [[User:Citation bot]]." But it isn't getting cleared.
::::It's stated that the category exists so [[User:Citation bot]] can do some kind of maintenance... But I'm unable to grok how it would clear it from what's written about it, except in a vague sense.  What should/does the bot currently do with the category, if anything?
::::[[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 06:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::Also, the bot (or triggering it) seems broken. https://citations.toolforge.org/category.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&cat=CS1+maint%3A+unflagged+free+DOI doesn't load. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 12:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
::::I support amending the access level parameters for identifiers to allow the keywords {{pval|registration}}, {{pval|limited}} and {{pval|subscription}} to be set too, not just {{pval|free}}. I believe it is natural for identifiers specified in {{para|doi}} etc. to make no assumptions about access levels by default, unless they are known to be (or not to be) free to read. [[User:本日晴天|本日晴天]] ([[User talk:本日晴天|talk]]) 05:24, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{tl|helpme}} Could use some more attention here from folks knowledgable about CS1.  E.g. with questions asked and help allowing |doi= to work with the usual keywords for indicating paywall issues do [not] exist.  I presume removing the block on these keywords should be easy for someone who groks CS1 internals. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 06:54, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
::::::Please don't use {{tl|helpme}} in the midst of an ongoing discussion. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 17:01, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@[[User:Pigsonthewing|Pigsonthewing]] Your interfering feels inappropriate simply because you provide no why.  Why not, exactly?  Seems appropriate to me.  Ongoing discussion of all I'm seeking help with?  How so?  So?  I see 2 weeks of near-silence.  The need for |doi= to work isn't being challenged - I only see (direct or implied) support for it - from ~4 editors on this page.  Do you see it differently?  And I need help - from someone who groks CS1 internals, which I find quite impenetrable.  Why intentionally impede progress?  Some impenetrable bureaucratic reason?  Please explain or revert.  I'm unable to figure out where the relevant code is. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 09:49, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
::::::::"interfering"? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 11:35, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Seriously?  (You interfered with my call for help above using {{tl|helpme}}, by disabling it.) [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 07:41, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::Seriously. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 09:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Be [[WP:Civil]]. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 09:12, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] penny for your thoughts?  Do you wrangle the relevant code?  [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1323909629 ?] [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 09:59, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
::::::::'''Oppose'''.  cs1|2 does not highlight the norm.  A url-linked title is presumed to be free-to-read unless marked otherwise by {{para|url-access|<nowiki>[subscription|registration|limited]</nowiki>}}.  In keeping with that philosophy, the named identifiers are presumed to have <code>[subscription|registration|limited]</code>-access restrictions unless marked otherwise by {{para|&lt;{{var|identifier}}>-access|free}}.
::::::::
::::::::Were we to support the various access icons for identifiers (it would be all of them, not just {{para|doi}}), I foresee floods of red locks in reference sections (sea-of-red) in well-maintained articles; an inconsistent smattering of red locks in those articles that are not so well maintained.
::::::::
::::::::The current system ain't broke so we have no need to fix it. 
::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::@[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]]
:::::::::What are you doing?  Obfuscation of Wiki functionality is not appropriate: [[Special:Diff/1322657259]]
:::::::::Explain your revert, which added false info I had removed. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 07:02, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::I have replaced your active edit-link url with an equivalent link to the diff of your edit.  Safer that way.
::::::::::
::::::::::cs1|2 have a lot of maintenance categories.  All of them are tracking cats that are permitted (encouraged) to be empty.  We should permit deletion of a maint cat only when we have decided that the condition that populated the maint cat no longer requires tracking and modified the cs1|2 module suite accordingly.  We have taken no such decisions or enacted any such modifications with regard to unflagged free dois and {{cl|CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI}}.
::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:52, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::My edit did not change the categories; they are unchanged with or without my edit? : 
:::::::::::Category: CS1 maintenance
:::::::::::Hidden categories: Hidden categories Tracking categories Automatic category TOC generates no TOC Pages with DOI errors.
:::::::::::The issue was the text, which ''now'' reads: "This category may be empty occasionally or even most of the time." 
:::::::::::It's a problem that it says at [[Help:Citation Style 1#Registration or subscription required]] that "[[:Category:CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI]], is routinely cleared by [[User:Citation bot]]."  But it isn't getting cleared.  (ANd since I originally noted that, the bot has been blocked.)  [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 23:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Bump.  See above.
:::::::::::Again: This category may be empty occasionally or even most of the time." is false. No part of that is hard to understand.
:::::::::::Again: delete-empty=yes because won't empty, indefinitely.  [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 07:03, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::Sigh.  It doesn't really matter if {{cl|CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI}} never empties.  But, if it does, {{para|delete-empty|yes}} gives any administrator permission to delete the category and therein lies the problem.  Assume that the category (with {{tlx|tracking category||delete-empty{{=}}yes}}) goes empty, an administrator looking for something to do sees that the category is empty and deletes it.  Sometime later, an editor adds a free-to-read doi to an article but neglects to add {{para|doi-access|free}}.  cs1|2 sees that the doi is free-to-read and that {{para|doi-access|free}} is missing so when that citation is rendered, cs1|2 also adds a (now red) link to the deleted category.  The missing category then ends up on the list at [[Special:WantedCategories]] where another editor will see the need for the category and then recreate it.  Then a bot or another editor adds the missing {{para|doi-access|free}}, category goes empty, admin deletes, another editor adds a free-to-read doi without {{para|doi-access|free}}, another editor recreates the category, the category is cleared, an admin deletes... ''ad nauseum''.  All of this can be avoided by omitting {{para|delete-empty|yes}} from the {{tld|tracking category}} template.
::::::::::::
::::::::::::We don't have a mechanism right now to exclude these 'permanent' not-free-to-read dois from the category, but that does not mean that we won't develop such a mechanism in future.
::::::::::::
::::::::::::If [[User:Citation bot|Citation bot]] is not clearing the category, that is a topic for the bot's maintainers.  This talk page is the wrong venue for Citation bot issues; discuss at [[User talk:Citation bot]].
::::::::::::
::::::::::::For cs1|2 maintained categories, it is best to omit {{para|delete-empty|yes}} from the {{tld|tracking category}} template in those categories.  I will not revert you again but I will support any other editor who chooses to revert your addition of {{para|delete-empty|yes}} to the {{tld|tracking category}} template.
::::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:19, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::In 74 years, when some enterprising citation nerd decides to code in a way to suppress erroneous unflagged free DOI cases, I would prefer the category not be deleted. I'd support removing the delete-empty parameter, and I don't think the text in the banner presents any issue. I'd be happy to compromise on creating a bespoke banner ("Administrators: Please do not delete this category as empty! This category might someday be empty.") and manually adding the "potentially empty" cat. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 14:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Sigh. It shouldn't have taken [[User talk:Trappist the monk#December 2025]] for the abuse to stop and even partial success inducing engagement.  And it wasn't inappropriate to identify the bot's contribution to the problem. Though you continue to not address my reason for the edit.  Fortunately @[[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] has begun to address it.  Thanks.  I'd be happy with their solution - provided it means the page won't still say "This category may be empty occasionally or even most of the time." - which I presume is the plan?  I think it addresses both our concerns.  Agreed, @[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]]? [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 11:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Even if the category never actually empties, that template still seems appropriate as a a precaution. [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 14:47, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Thanks for the reply.  But I don't understand.  I'm seeing circular reasoning: we don't want red locks because our philosopy is we don't want red locks isn't an argument.  
:::::::::Is there not consensus on wikipedia that colored locks are best practice?  I vaguely recall there was such a consensus.  Overturned? [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 07:16, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::That is not the philosophy that I stated.  The philosophy regarding access icons that I stated is: {{tq|cs1{{!}}2 does not highlight the norm}}.  It has been ever thus since we adopted these icons as replacements for their ambiguous simple-text predecessors ('Requires subscription' and 'Requires registration').  There was an RFC that decided that access icons were to be preferred over the ambiguous simple-text annotations.  Another RFC applied to the design of the access icons.  If you cast about, no doubt you can find those RFCs.
::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:52, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Subscription required is the norm?   What fraction of published papers are open access in 2025?  About 50%, per [[google:what+fraction+of+published+papers+are+open+access+in+2025?|google's]] AI.  (Probably a bit less, but increasing.)  So there is no norm.  [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 23:00, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Maybe you can flesh out here or in the docs what  <q>cs1|2 does not highlight the norm</q> means.  What is the norm? Is there one norm?  One per type of source?  Based on...? [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 23:40, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::It's clearly documented at [[WP:URLACCESS]]: "As a courtesy to readers and other editors, editors should signal restrictions on access to material provided via the external links included in a citation".  Makes sense.  You are intentionally impeding editors from doing what we tell them to do there?  Seems nonsensical to me.  1 small lock per source can't lead to a sea of red. [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 07:30, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::You have cherry-picked a single sentence from [[WP:URLACCESS]].  The whole of {{slink|Help:Citation_Style_1|Registration_or_subscription_required}} (including {{slink|Help:Citation_Style_1#Access_indicators_for_url-holding_parameters|nopage=y}}, {{slink|Help:Citation_Style_1|Access_indicator_for_named_identifiers|nopage=y}}, and {{slink|Help:Citation_Style_1|Tracking_of_free_DOIs|nopage=y}}) applies to the use of access icons.  I wrote some of that documentation.  I guess I thought it obvious that the various subsections of WP:URLACCESS amplified and explained the section's introduction, but then, it is widely held that I suck at documentation.
::::::::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:52, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::I can't find any part of [[Help:Citation Style 1]] that suggests in any way that "As a courtesy to readers and other editors, editors should signal restrictions on access to material provided via the external links included in a citation" doesn't make sense. 
:::::::::::Based on the search I noted above, I figure that there is no norm among wikipedia source links, and it's unlikely that the majority are subscription-only.  Do you have data showing otherwise?  I don't know how to check, but I'm guessing you have the chops to. The norm you are claiming exists and are avoiding highlighting is subscription-only links or what?  You're not being clear.  You wrote "A url-linked title is presumed to be free-to-read" which would imply that it's green links you're avoiding adding.  But then you're saying it's red ones (a sea-of-red) you're avoiding adding.  
:::::::::::If I'm not mistaken you wrote much of the code for which you note you wrote some of the documentation.  Kudos.  
:::::::::::Are you ok with the change I'm seeking if an RFC confirms that we should be complying with "As a courtesy to readers and other editors, editors should signal restrictions on access to material provided via the external links included in a citation" ? [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 23:21, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::Have you sought input on the proposed rendering at broader venues like the Village Pump? People often have strong objections to even small aesthetic changes. [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 14:49, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Bumpety bump!  [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 05:29, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

== 'title' parameter in '[[Template:cite report]]' not being displayed in either 'quotation marks' or 'italics' like in other [[Help:Citation Style 1|Citation Style 1]] templates ==

Is there any reason the parameter <code>title</code> in {{tl|cite report}} isn't being displayed in '''either''' ''italics'' (like in the [[Help:Citation Style 1|Citation Style 1]] templates {{tl|cite AV media}}, {{tl|cite AV media notes}}, {{tl|cite book}}, {{tl|cite conference}} (unless the parameter <code>book-title</code> is defined), {{tl|cite encyclopedia}} (if both the parameters {{tooltip|{{codett|chapter}}|or any of its aliases, including: article; contribution; entry; and section}} and {{tooltip|{{codett|encyclopedia}}|or alias dictionary}}, the parameter {{tooltip|{{codett|chapter}}|or any of its aliases, including: article; contribution; entry; and section}}, but not {{tooltip|{{codett|encyclopedia}}|or alias dictionary}}, or neither of those parameters, are defined), {{tl|cite map}} (unless the parameter {{tooltip|{{codett|website}}|or any of its aliases, including: journal; magazine; newspaper; periodical; and work}} is used), {{tl|cite serial}}, {{tl|cite sign}}, {{tl|cite speech}}, {{tl|cite tech report}}, and {{tl|cite thesis}}) '''or''' "quotation marks" (like in other [[Help:Citation Style 1|Citation Style 1]] templates {{tl|cite arXiv}}, {{tl|cite bioRxiv}}, {{tl|cite CiteSeerX}}, {{tl|cite conference}} (if the parameter <code>book-title</code> is defined), {{tl|cite document}}, {{tl|cite encyclopedia}} (if the parameter {{tooltip|{{codett|encyclopedia}}|or alias dictionary}}, but not {{tooltip|{{codett|chapter}}|or any of its aliases, including: article; contribution; entry; and section}}, is defined), {{tl|cite episode}}, {{tl|cite interview}}, {{tl|cite journal}}, {{tl|cite magazine}}, {{tl|cite mailing list}}, {{tl|cite map}} (if the parameter {{tooltip|{{codett|website}}|or any of its aliases, including: journal; magazine; newspaper; periodical; and work}} is defined), {{tl|cite medRxiv}}, {{tl|cite news}}, {{tl|cite newsgroup}}, {{tl|cite podcast}}, {{tl|cite press release}}, {{tl|cite SSRN}}, and {{tl|cite web}}, and the [[Help:Citation Style 2|Citation Style 2]] template {{tl|citation}})? [[User:PK2|PK2]] ([[User talk:PK2|talk]]; [[Special:Contributions/PK2|contributions]]) 12:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:If I remember correctly, the title-without-style was a decision taken by someone in the pre-lua days:
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite report/old|title=Report title}}</syntaxhighlight> → {{cite report/old|title=Report title}}
:When converted to use [[Module:Citation/CS1]], that title-without-style was retained.  Perhaps, if you search for it, you will find a relevant discussion somewhere in the archives of the various talk pages.  Next time, no wall of text please.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:11, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:Maybe there was a reason.  But I can't think of a good one for this outlier behavior.  Change?
:It would be helpful if [[Module_talk:Citation/CS1/testcases]]<nowiki> had an entry for {{</nowiki>[[Template:Cite report|cite report]]<nowiki>}}?</nowiki> [[User:RememberOrwell|RememberOrwell]] ([[User talk:RememberOrwell|talk]]) 00:54, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

== "line feed character" problem ==

I have created a ref, and the formatting seems fine to me, but no matter what I do, I keep running into a "line feed character" problem:
* [[Michelle Goldberg]] asserts that Russia has "leverage" over Trump.<ref name="Goldberg_11/30/2018">{{cite news | last=Goldberg | first=Michelle | author-link=Michelle Goldberg | title=Trump Is Compromised by Russia | newspaper=[[The New York Times]] | date=November 30, 2018 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/opinion/cohen-trump-putin-russia-mueller.html | access-date=December 3, 2025 | quote=One of the chief questions in the Trump-Russia scandal has been whether Vladimir Putin has leverage over the president of the United States, and, if so, what that leverage looks like. The significance of the fabled 'pee tape,' after all, is not that it would reveal Donald Trump to be a pervert bent on defiling the place where Barack Obama slept. Rather, the tape matters because, if real, it would show the president to be vulnerable to Russian blackmail.{{nbsp}}...</br>
That's also why evidence of Trump's business involvement with Russia would be significant,{{nbsp}}...</br>
We still don't know for certain if Russia has ''used'' leverage over Trump. But there should no longer be any doubt that Russia ''has'' leverage over him.{{nbsp}}...</br>
'If the Russians are aware that senior American officials are publicly stating things that are not true, it's a counterintelligence nightmare,' Adam Schiff, the California Democrat in line to take over the House Intelligence Committee, told me.}}</ref>

{{reftalk}}

Where is the problem? -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) (PING me) 17:51, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Valjean|Valjean]], use just the line break tag <code><nowiki><br /></nowiki></code> and not a line break in the source text of the quote:
:* {{cite news | last=Goldberg | first=Michelle | author-link=Michelle Goldberg | title=Trump Is Compromised by Russia | newspaper=[[The New York Times]] | date=November 30, 2018 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/opinion/cohen-trump-putin-russia-mueller.html | access-date=December 3, 2025 | quote=One of the chief questions in the Trump-Russia scandal has been whether Vladimir Putin has leverage over the president of the United States, and, if so, what that leverage looks like. The significance of the fabled 'pee tape,' after all, is not that it would reveal Donald Trump to be a pervert bent on defiling the place where Barack Obama slept. Rather, the tape matters because, if real, it would show the president to be vulnerable to Russian blackmail.{{nbsp}}...<br /> That's also why evidence of Trump's business involvement with Russia would be significant,{{nbsp}}...<br />We still don't know for certain if Russia has ''used'' leverage over Trump. But there should no longer be any doubt that Russia ''has'' leverage over him.{{nbsp}}...<br />'If the Russians are aware that senior American officials are publicly stating things that are not true, it's a counterintelligence nightmare,' Adam Schiff, the California Democrat in line to take over the House Intelligence Committee, told me.}}
:You can see them in the [https://www.soscisurvey.de/tools/view-chars.php hidden Unicode characters]. [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 19:39, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
:: OMG! You're right. Thanks. -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) (PING me) 19:58, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

== preview warning messages ==

Preview warning messages look summat like this:
<div style="margin-left:1.6em;" class="cdx-message cdx-message--warning cdx-message--block">
<span class="cdx-message__icon"></span><div class="cdx-message__content">
{{int:Previewnote}} <span class="mw-continue-editing"> {{fakelink|→ {{int:Continue-editing}}|#editform}}</span>

{{int:Scribunto-lua-warning|{{color|#085|One or more {{mono|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:cite book|cite book]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}} templates have maintenance messages}}; messages may be hidden ([[Help:CS1_errors#Controlling_error_message_display|help]]).}}

{{int:Scribunto-lua-warning|{{color|#d33|One or more {{mono|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:cite journal|cite journal]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}} templates have errors}}; messages may be hidden ([[Help:CS1_errors#Controlling_error_message_display|help]]).}}
</div>
</div>
It used to be that the 'One or more' text made sense because the <code>addWarning()</code> mechanism created only one message for all templates that emitted those messages; duplicate messages were suppressed.  And then MediaWiki changed that.  Not too long ago, MediaWiki started displaying a message for each time <code>addWarning()</code> is called.  For each cs1|2 template, [[Module:Citation/CS1]] can call <code>addWarning()</code> no more that two times: once for error messages and once for maintenance messages.  So, the 'One or more' text no longer makes sense.

Should we change the message text?  If we do, one thing we might do is to link to the offending template when that template has a <code>CITEREF</code> identifier.  These identifiers are created automatically when a cs1|2 template has one or more contributor/author/editor name (in that order) or when {{para|ref}} is set to something other than <code>none</code>.  We might create random identifiers for those templates that don't automatically create an identifier.  I don't think that it is possible to guarantee that such identifiers would always be unique – but then, we can't guarantee that contributor/author/editor + date <code>CITEREF</code> identifiers are unique either...  Because each cs1|2 template is rendered in isolation from the others in the page, there is no way to know which identifiers were created before MediaWiki called Module:Citation/CS1 to process {{em|this}} template.

Here are the questions:
*should we change the error and maintenance preview messages?  If yes,
**what should the new wording be?
**when we can, should we link from the message to the offending template?  If yes,
***should we create random identifiers when necessary (for use only in preview mode)?
***what would the new wording be when we can link?
***if we choose not to create random identifiers, what would the new wording be when we cannot link?
—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 18:38, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
:The community having demonstrated overwhelming indifference, I have tweaked the sandbox so that it creates new preview messages and links each message to the matching template's <code>CITEREF</code> anchor ID.  When the template does not create a <code>CITEREF</code> anchor ID (no contributor/author/editor names or custom ID), the sandbox creates a temporary <code>CITEREF</code> anchor ID from a six-digit random number for use only when the page is previewed.
:
:Here are some examples.  To see the preview warning messages, edit and then preview this discussion section.
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Green |first=EB |work=Work |date=2025}}</syntaxhighlight> – creates <code>CITEREFGreen2025</code> anchor ID
:*:{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Green |first=EB |work=Work |date=2025}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new |title=Title |work=Work |date=2025}}</syntaxhighlight> – creates <code>CITEREF_temp_preview_id_XXXXXX</code> anchor ID where XXXXXX is a six-digit pseudo-random number
:*:{{cite book/new |title=Title |work=Work |date=2025}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Grey |first=EB |date=2025 |year=2025}}</syntaxhighlight> – creates <code>CITEREFGrey2025</code> anchor ID
:*:{{cite book/new |title=Title |last=Grey |first=EB |date=2025 |year=2025}}
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new |title=Title |date=2025 |year=2025}}</syntaxhighlight> – creates <code>CITEREF_temp_preview_id_XXXXXX</code> anchor ID where XXXXXX is a six-digit pseudo-random number
:*:{{cite book/new |title=Title |date=2025 |year=2025}}
:Also works with custom anchor IDs ({{para|ref|&lt;{{var|custom ID}}>}}):
:*<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite book/new |title=Title |date=2025 |year=2025 |ref=Custom ID}}</syntaxhighlight> – creates <code>Custom ID</code> anchor ID
:*:{{cite book/new |title=Title |date=2025 |year=2025 |ref=Custom ID}}
:Keep?  Discard?  Do it differently?
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 19:22, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
::I like this a lot, it's a keep from me. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 19:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
:::I may be a bit slow, but I don't see a difference in preview, "/new" or not. -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 01:05, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::::Here is a mockup derived from the mockup in my OP:
<div style="margin-left:8.0em;" class="cdx-message cdx-message--warning cdx-message--block">
<span class="cdx-message__icon"></span><div class="cdx-message__content">
{{int:Previewnote}} <span class="mw-continue-editing"> {{fakelink|→ {{int:Continue-editing}}|#editform}}</span>

{{int:Scribunto-lua-warning|{{color|#085|{{mono|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:cite book|cite book]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}: This [[#CITEREFGrey2025|reference]] has maintenance messages}}; messages may be hidden ([[Help:CS1_errors#Controlling_error_message_display|help]]).}}

{{int:Scribunto-lua-warning|{{color|#d33|{{mono|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:cite book|cite book]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}: This [[#CITEREFGreen2025|reference]] has errors}}; messages may be hidden ([[Help:CS1_errors#Controlling_error_message_display|help]]).}}
</div>
</div>
::::Compare the messages displayed in this message box mockup to the messages displayed in the mockup in my OP.  They are different.  When you edit and then preview this discussion section, the messages in the actual preview warning box should be similar in format to those shown in this second mockup.  There will be five messages and they will each link to the rendered reference that matches the preview warning message.
::::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 02:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::KEEP. This makes the message much more useful. Thanks for that! – [[User:SirOlgen|SirOlgen]] ([[User talk:SirOlgen|talk]]) 03:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:::Agreed. And being able to click the links and hop down to the erroneous reference is much quicker than trying to crtl+F for them. Also, this let's someone with CSS maintenance turned off (the default) to still see which references are flagged for maintenance. [[User:Rjjiii|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rjj<sup>iii</sup></span>]] ([[User talk:Rjjiii|talk]]) 04:04, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

== please show syntax for handling references to multiple sections in one source ==

On the [[Template:Cite encyclopedia]] page, just before the Parameters section, it'd be helpful if you could show the syntax for handling references to multiple sections in one source. This is specifically the sentence starting with "This text uses uncommon-term_1". I'd review the syntax myself by hitting the edit button (and then canceling without making any edits), but the page is locked. [[User:Jrtuenge|Jrtuenge]] ([[User talk:Jrtuenge|talk]]) 02:36, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

:The documentation shown on [[Template:Cite encyclopedia]] (true for most, if not all, templates) is actually stored on the '/doc' sub-page and generally isn't locked. In this case, you would want to go to [[Template:Cite encyclopedia/doc]]. From there you should be able to use the <EDIT> function to view the syntax of the [[Template:Cite encyclopedia/doc#Examples|Examples]] section. Rgds – [[User:SirOlgen|SirOlgen]] ([[User talk:SirOlgen|talk]]) 03:50, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
::Perfect, understood -- thanks for the prompt response and education! [[User:Jrtuenge|Jrtuenge]] ([[User talk:Jrtuenge|talk]]) 17:00, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

== SSRN limit update ==

SSRN 5798224 is valid (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5798224) and is found on [[Telehealth]]. Could we update the limit? [[User:Snowman304|'''Snowman304''']]'''&#124;'''[[User talk:Snowman304|'''talk''']] 00:35, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

== URL access-indicator parameters ==

Hello. Unlike '''doi'''-access=, '''url'''-access= has no "free" option (at best "subscription" or "limited").

I imagine Wikipedia encourage accessible sources. Would it be useful to add a "free" parameter?

[[User:Atis Muller|Atis Muller]] ([[User talk:Atis Muller|talk]]) 15:42, 7 December 2025 (UTC).
:No.  cs1|2 templates presume that a source linked by {{para|url}} is free-to-read.  That presumption is the {{em|norm}}.  Because cs1|2 templates presume that sources linked from {{para|url}} are free-to-read, it is not necessary to mark a free-to-read source as free-to-read; {{para|url-access|free}} would be pointlessly redundant mark-up clutter so is not supported.
:
:For the named identifiers ({{para|doi}} etc) the opposite holds: sources linked by the named identifiers are {{em|not}} presumed to be free-to-read.  That presumption is the {{em|norm}} for named identifiers.  Instead, sources linked by the named identifiers are presumed to lie behind paywall or registration barriers so the various {{para|&lt;{{var|identifier}}>-access|[subscription{{!}}registration{{!}}limited]}} parameters / values are not supported because they would be pointlessly redundant mark-up clutter.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 16:46, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

== Duplicate ID lint errors ==

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LintErrors&wpNamespaceRestrictions=0&titlesearch=DoorDash+Girl+controversy&exactmatch=1<br style="margin-bottom:0.5em"/>This seems to be caused by references like:<ul><li>{{Cite web|title=First article|first=Joe|last=Schmoe|date=2025-01-01|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1}}</li><li>{{Cite web|title=Another article by the same author half a year later|first=Joe|last=Schmoe|date=2025-07-01|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2}}</li></ul>Both produce <code><nowiki>&lt;cite id="CITEREFSchmoe2025"</nowiki></code> in HTML.<span id="Alexis_Jazz:1765155215741:Help_talkFTTCLNCitation_Style_1" class="FTTCmt"> — <span style="color:#e08020">Alexis Jazz</span> ([[User talk:Alexis Jazz|talk]] or ping me) 00:53, 8 December 2025 (UTC)</span>
:Yep.  Each cs1|2 rendering takes place in isolation.  There is no communication between cs1|2 templates so each has no idea that there are other cs1|2 templates in the article and so has no idea what <code>CITEREF</code> anchor ids are already in use.
:
:You can suppress a duplicate <code>CITEREF</code> anchor id by setting {{para|ref|none}}.  Similarly, you can create plaintext custom anchor ids ({{para|ref|&lt;{{var|plaintext id}}>}} or custom <code>CITEREF</code> anchor ids with {{tlx|sfnref}} but, warning, you may need to force any short-form reference templates ({{tlx|sfn}} or {{tld|harv}}-family) to use that same custom identifier ({{para|ref}} in the matching short-form reference template).
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 01:33, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
::[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]], what is the reason it uses this hardly-unique combination of last name+year?<span id="Alexis_Jazz:1765198978911:Help_talkFTTCLNCitation_Style_1" class="FTTCmt"> — <span style="color:#e08020">Alexis Jazz</span> ([[User talk:Alexis Jazz|talk]] or ping me) 13:02, 8 December 2025 (UTC)</span>
:::Because long ago, some editor or group of editors decided that cs1|2 would support [[Author–date referencing|Author–date (Harvard) referencing]], a referencing system that has been in use since the 1880s.  Whether the decision for cs1|2 to support Harvard referencing followed from the development of the {{tlx|Harvard citation}} family of templates or the other way 'round, I don't know.
:::—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 14:07, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

::Surely [[Template:Sfn#More than one work in a year]] would come in handy? If you’re set on using the YYYY-MM-DD format, you can add {{para|year|2025a}} in addition to {{para|date|2025-01-01}}. [[User:Keriluamox|Keriluamox]] ([[User talk:Keriluamox|talk]]) 07:42, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

== Self published ==

{{xt|For self-published works (i.e., where the publisher is the same as the author or creator) state <nowiki>|publisher=</nowiki>self-published.}}
Does it also apply to artists' official store or official websites? I often cite them for physical releases or as a source, but I'm still not sure what to put on {{para|publisher}}. (I have used {{para|publisher|(Arist name) Official Store}} form tho) [[User:Camilasdandelions|<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'; color:#ff85f9">''' ''Camilasdandelions'' '''</span>]] ([[User talk:Camilasdandelions|<span style="font-size: 0.95em; font-family: Georgia; color:#2550a4">talk!</span>]]) 13:40, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

== Protected edit request on 10 December 2025 ==

Can we add a parameter for the [[CNKI]], similar to what we currently have for other identifiers? It'd be similar to what's already on [[:zh:Cite journal|the Chinese Wikipedia version]] of this template. It'd make accurately citing journal articles from China a little more easy. <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS; border-radius:35% 0; font-weight:bold; background:linear-gradient(300deg,#ff0d00,#1AD); color:#fff; padding:2px 5px;">[[User:Gommeh|<span style="color: white;">Gommeh</span>]]&nbsp;[[User:Gommeh/Guestbook|📖]]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[[User talk:Gommeh|🎮]]</span> 15:21, 10 December 2025 (UTC)
:That link to the Chinese Wikipedia does not lead me to a template. Does CNKI use identifiers? If so, the usual advice is to put them in {{para|id}} using {{tl|CNKI}} or some similar template that creates links from identifiers (cf {{tl|doi}}), and then come back to this page when there is a significant enough population of articles using {{tl|CNKI}} in {{para|id}} that a new, standalone parameter is warranted. This should probably be a FAQ for this page. – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 06:03, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

== url= Parameter in <code><nowiki>{{cite encyclopedia}}</nowiki></code> links to entry instead of encyclopedia/work ==

I was trying to write a {{tnull|cite encyclopedia}} reference where I had an Archive.org URL to the page number of the entry (using {{para|page| [url ''pageno'']}}), and wanted to also just link the top-level (no page number) URL to the work/encyclopedia using {{tnull|cite encyclopedia}}'s {{para|url}} parameter. But the rendered text makes the ''entry'' ({{para|title}}) the link, instead of the encyclopedia/work ({{para|encyclopedia}}):

{| class="wikitable"
|-
| {{demo|br=<td>|<nowiki>{{cite encyclopedia |last1= Fadness |first1= Rodger J. |last2= Wallechinsky |first2= David |last3= Wallace |first3= Amy |editor1-last= Wallechinsky |editor1-first= David |editor2-last= Wallace |editor2-first= Amy |date= 2005 |title= 17 Famous People Who Were Expelled From School |encyclopedia= The Book of Lists |page= [https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/page/15/ 15] |publisher= Canongate Books |location= Edinburgh/New York/Melbourne |url= https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/ |url-access= registration }}</nowiki></td> }}
|}

This acts more like you'd expect {{para|chapter-url}} in {{tnull|cite book}} to work, linking to the specific section/chapter/entry. Using {{tnull|cite encyclopedia}}, I don't see a way to link to the '''work/encyclopedia''' separately from the entry. Am I missing something?

If I'm not misunderstanding, I'd like to suggest/request that {{tnull|cite encyclopedia}} be changed so that:

# {{para|url}} using the {{para|encyclopedia}} as the link and text, instead of using {{para|title}}.
# {{para|entry-url}} be added as a parameter that's an alias for {{para|chapter-url}}, and make them ({{para|chapter-url}} use {{para|title}} for the link and text.

This would be a potentially breaking change for existing uses. An alternate, non-breaking change, would just be:

* add {{para|encyclopedia-url}} as a specific parameter to this {{tnull|cite XXX}} variant.
&emsp;—&#8239;'''[[User:sbb|sbb]]'''&#8239;([[User Talk:sbb|talk]]) 23:37, 10 December 2025 (UTC)
:{{para|url}} {{em|always}} links {{para|title}} in any and all cs1|2 templates.  {{para|entry}} is an alias of {{para|chapter}} so {{para|entry-url}} already exists.  To fix your example template:
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline="1">{{cite encyclopedia |last1=Fadness |first1=Rodger J. |last2=Wallechinsky |first2=David |last3=Wallace |first3=Amy |editor1-last=Wallechinsky |editor1-first=David |editor2-last=Wallace |editor2-first=Amy |date=2005 |entry=17 Famous People Who Were Expelled From School |title=The Book of Lists |page=[https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/page/15/ 15] |publisher=Canongate Books |location=Edinburgh/New York/Melbourne |url=https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/ |url-access=registration}}</syntaxhighlight>
:::{{cite encyclopedia |last1=Fadness |first1=Rodger J. |last2=Wallechinsky |first2=David |last3=Wallace |first3=Amy |editor1-last=Wallechinsky |editor1-first=David |editor2-last=Wallace |editor2-first=Amy |date=2005 |entry=17 Famous People Who Were Expelled From School |title=The Book of Lists |page=[https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/page/15/ 15] |publisher=Canongate Books |location=Edinburgh/New York/Melbourne |url=https://archive.org/details/bookoflists0000wall/ |url-access=registration}}
:{{tlx|cite encyclopedia}} is already an oddball; adding another parameter just for the use of this template merely extends its oddball-ness.  Previous discussion about the oddities of {{tld|cite encyclopedia}} have not produced a definitive answer.  There are those who think that {{para|title}} / {{para|encyclopedia}} should be preferred (much like {{tlx|cite journal}}) and there are those who think that {{para|entry}} or {{para|article}} / {{para|title}} should be preferred (much like {{tlx|cite book}}).
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 00:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
:: *sheepish facepalm*. I can't believe I missed {{para|entry}} entirely. I've been using {{para|title}} for the title of the entry, and {{para|encyclopedia}} for title of the book for so long, I completely missed that {{para|entry}} was there.
::Yeah, I've always thought {{tld|cite encyclopedia}} was a bit of an odd duck; as much as it might be (from your maintenance/coding perspective), with your suggested usage, it'll be a lot less odd for me in the future. Thanks for your help.
::&emsp;—&#8239;'''[[User:sbb|sbb]]'''&#8239;([[User Talk:sbb|talk]]) 06:43, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

== S2CID limit increased ==
Hi, so I was adding references when I noticed that there was an S2CID error in terms of its maximum limit (280000000), but the number I referenced ([https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:283350357 283350357])<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Boden |first1=Joanne S. |last2=Nieves-Morión |first2=Mercedes |last3=Nürnberg |first3=Dennis J. |last4=Arévalo |first4=Sergio |last5=Flores |first5=Enrique |last6=Sánchez-Baracaldo |first6=Patricia |date=November 27, 2025 |title=Evolution of multicellularity genes in Cyanobacteria in the lead up to the great oxidation event |journal=[[Communications Biology]] |volume=8 |article-number=1721 |publisher=[[Springer Nature]] |doi=10.1038/s42003-025-09247-6 |doi-access=free |eissn=2399-3642 |pmc=12669612 |pmid=41309968 |s2cid=283350357 |s2cid-access=free}} {{open access}}</ref> is legitimate, so the limit should be increased now (I was informed to report this here). — <b>[[User:Alex26337|<span style="color:#6e7f92;">Alex</span><span style="color:#777799;">26337</span>]]</b> <sup>([[User talk:Alex26337|<span style="color:#909090;">'''talk'''</span>]])</sup> 17:38, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

{{ref-talk}}

== Dead links in multi-url cites ==
* <code><nowiki>{{Cite book |url=http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |title=Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report / Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement |date=October 2009 |publisher=Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works; Federal Transit Administration |chapter=Appendix B: Station and Alignment Selection Analysis |pages=10–11 |chapter-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705145947/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121031141325/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |archive-date=October 31, 2012 |url-status=dead}}</nowiki></code> 
* {{Cite book |url=http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |title=Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report / Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement |date=October 2009 |publisher=Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works; Federal Transit Administration |chapter=Appendix B: Station and Alignment Selection Analysis |pages=10–11 |chapter-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705145947/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121031141325/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |archive-date=October 31, 2012 |url-status=dead}}

The {{para|chapter}} is displaying the contents of {{para|url}} even though {{para|chapter-url}} has something different. The "Archived from the original" links not to an an original URL but to the archive URL. 

A workaround is:

* <code><nowiki>{{Cite book |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705134146/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |title=Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report / Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement |date=October 2009 |publisher=Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works; Federal Transit Administration |chapter=Appendix B: Station and Alignment Selection Analysis |pages=10–11 |chapter-url=http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705145947/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-date=July 5, 2016}}</nowiki></code> 
* {{Cite book |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705134146/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/docs_draftEIR.html |title=Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report / Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement |date=October 2009 |publisher=Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works; Federal Transit Administration |chapter=Appendix B: Station and Alignment Selection Analysis |pages=10–11 |chapter-url=http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705145947/http://greenlineextension.eot.state.ma.us/documents/draftEIR/App_B_thru_J/133_AppB_StationAlignSelAnalysis.pdf |archive-date=July 5, 2016}}

However, this adds an archive URL to the {{para|url}} field, which various tools consider an error (correctly most of the time), they automatically move the archive URL to the {{para|archive-url}} field, and replace {{para|url}} with the original/source URL. It is thus non-robust when both {{para|url}} and {{para|chapter-url}} are dead and each need an archive URL. As a solution, support archive URLs directly in {{para|whatever-url}} fields, without side-effect, and {{para|archive-url}} is only applicable to {{para|url}} (if it exists or default to the next available URL parameter). -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 05:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

:I've been annoyed by this as well. There are workarounds, but the [[Internet Archive]] is a legitimate primary consultation location for a work and should be considered ok as primary URL for a work, just like we can link to JSTOR.org or other archives for journals. [[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 13:28, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

== List of proper parameters to use for RS ==

Is there a list somewhere that shows the proper parameter to use for each RS? IOW, when to use newspaper=, agency=, work=, etc. -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) (PING me) 19:52, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

== How to format a month-year publication date? ==

I have a trouble with formatting a publication date for "Natural Resource Inventory" ref at [[Indian River (Connecticut)]] article, which is just '''May, 2002'''. How do I format it with {{tl|cite web}}? --[[User:CiaPan|CiaPan]] ([[User talk:CiaPan|talk]]) 21:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
:{{para|date|May 2022}}  Omit the comma.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
::Yes. This is a type of date for which there is not really any style choice. MDY and DMY format it the same and numeric is not allowed for month-only dates (because 2002-05 would be ambiguous as to whether it is a month and year or year range). —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 21:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

:::{{re|Trappist the monk|David Eppstein}} Thank you for the explanation. --[[User:CiaPan|CiaPan]] ([[User talk:CiaPan|talk]]) 21:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
:::{{re|Bagumba}} Thank you for the fix ([[Special:Diff/1327720261]]). --[[User:CiaPan|CiaPan]] ([[User talk:CiaPan|talk]]) 21:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

== COinS pollution shouldn't be a problem ==

{{fake heading|sub=3|Case 1: {{t|interlanguage link}}}}
At the top of the documentation for the {{t|interlanguage link}} template, there is [[Template:COinS safe|a banner]] that says:
:This template '''should not be used in [[Wikipedia:Citation templates|citation templates]]''' such as [[Help:Citation Style 1|Citation Style 1]] and [[Help:Citation Style 2|Citation Style 2]], because it includes markup that will pollute the [[COinS]] metadata they produce; see [[Wikipedia:COinS]].

If you ignore this banner and decide to, for example, put an <nowiki>{{interlanguage link}}</nowiki> in the {{mono|website}} parameter of <nowiki>{{cite web}}</nowiki>, it looks like this:
{{markup
|
<nowiki>
{{cite web
| last = Doe
| first = John
| title = Title
| url = https://example.com
| website = {{interlanguage link|red link example|lt=Website|de}}
}}
</nowiki>
| {{cite web |last=Doe |first=John |title=Title |url=https://example.com |website={{ill|red link example|lt=Website|de}}}}
}}

This produces the following HTML:
<syntaxhighlight lang="html">'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000010-QINU`"'<cite id="CITEREFDoe" class="citation web cs1">Doe, John. [https://example.com "Title"]. ''[[red link example|Website]]<span class="noprint" style="font-size:85%; font-style: normal; ">&nbsp;&#40;[[:de:red link example|de]]&#41;</span>''.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=Website%3Cspan+class%3D%22noprint%22+style%3D%22font-size%3A85%25%3B+font-style%3A+normal%3B+%22%3E+%26%2340%3Bde%26%2341%3B%3C%2Fspan%3E&rft.atitle=Title&rft.aulast=Doe&rft.aufirst=John&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fexample.com&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHelp+talk%3ACitation+Style+1" class="Z3988"></span></syntaxhighlight>

That big {{mono|span}} tag contains the following COinS metadata:
{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible"
! Key || Value
|-
| {{mono|ctx_ver}}
| {{mono|Z39.88-2004}}
|-
| {{mono|rft_val_fmt}}
| {{mono|info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal}}
|-
| {{mono|rft.genre}}
| {{mono|unknown}}
|-
| {{failure|align=left|{{mono|rft.jtitle}}}}
| {{failure|align=left|{{mono|Website&#60;span class&#61;"noprint" style&#61;"font-size:85%; font-style: normal; "&#62; &#40;de&#41;&#60;/span&#62;}}}}
|-
| {{mono|rft.atitle}}
| {{mono|Title}}
|-
| {{mono|rft.aulast}}
| {{mono|Doe}}
|-
| {{mono|rft.aufirst}}
| {{mono|John}}
|-
| {{mono|rft_id}}
| {{mono|https://<nowiki/>example.com}}
|-
| {{mono|rfr_id}}
| {{mono|info:sid/en.wikipedia.org:Help talk:Citation Style 1}}
|}

As you can see, there is a leftover {{mono|span}} tag in the {{mono|rft.jtitle}} value. Apparently, this is the "pollution" that the banner is talking about. To fix this, the following rule should be implemented:

{{greentext|If an HTML tag has the {{mono|noprint}} class, remove it and its contents from the COinS metadata.}}

{{fake heading|sub=3|Case 2: {{t|val}}, {{t|mvar}}, and {{t|math}}}}
<nowiki>{{Interlanguage link}}</nowiki> is only one of many {{category|Category:Templates not safe for use in citation templates|templates that cause COinS pollution}}. The discussion at {{slink|Wikipedia talk:COinS#the COINS warning: where not to use, exactly?}} mentions {{t|val}}, {{t|mvar}}, and {{t|math}} as other templates that would be useful in citations, if only they didn't cause COinS pollution. Let's take a closer look at those three:
{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible"
! Markup || Polluted {{mono|rft.jtitle}} value
|-
| {{mono|<nowiki>{{cite web |website= {{val|1234567}} }}</nowiki>}}
| {{mono|&#60;span class&#61;"nowrap"&#62;&#60;span data-sort-value&#61;"7006123456700000000♠"&#62;&#60;/span&#62;1&#60;span style&#61;"margin-left:.25em;"&#62;234&#60;/span&#62;&#60;span style&#61;"margin-left:.25em;"&#62;567&#60;/span&#62;&#60;/span&#62;}}
|-
| {{mono|<nowiki>{{cite web |website= {{mvar|example}} }}</nowiki>}}
| {{mono|&#60;span class&#61;"texhtml mvar" style&#61;"font-style:italic;"&#62;example&#60;/span&#62;}}
|-
| {{mono|<nowiki>{{cite web |website= {{math|example}} }}</nowiki>}}
| {{mono|&#60;span class&#61;"texhtml " &#62;example&#60;/span&#62;}}
|}

Again, the pollution takes the form of unwanted {{mono|span}} tags. This time, however, we want to keep the text that is inside. To fix this, the following rule should be implemented:

{{greentext|If an HTML tag does not have the {{mono|noprint}} class, remove it—but {{em|not}} its contents—from the COinS metadata.}}

{{fake heading|sub=3|Case 3: more complex math}}
The discussion at {{slink|Wikipedia talk:COinS#the COINS warning: where not to use, exactly?}} also mentions that more complex math expressions can cause more extreme pollution. Here are two examples featuring the [[quadratic formula]]:
{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible"
! Markup || Polluted {{mono|rft.jtitle}} value
|-
| {{mono|<nowiki>{{cite web |website= {{math|''x'' {{=}} {{sfrac|−''b'' ± {{sqrt|''b''<sup>2</sup> − 4''ac''}}|2''a''}}}} }}</nowiki>}}
| {{mono|&#60;span class&#61;"texhtml " &#62;x &#61; '"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000006B-QINU`"'&#60;span class&#61;"sfrac"&#62;&amp;NoBreak;&#60;span class&#61;"tion" &#62;&#60;span class&#61;"num"&#62;−b ± &#60;span class&#61;"nowrap"&#62;&radic;&#60;span style&#61;"border-top:1px solid; padding:0 0.1em;"&#62;b&#60;sup&#62;2&#60;/sup&#62; − 4ac&#60;/span&#62;&#60;/span&#62;&#60;/span&#62;&#60;span class&#61;"sr-only"&#62;/&#60;/span&#62;&#60;span class&#61;"den"&#62;2a&#60;/span&#62;&#60;/span&#62;&amp;NoBreak;&#60;/span&#62;&#60;/span&#62;}}
|-
| {{mono|<nowiki>{{cite web |website= <math>x=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}</math> }}</nowiki>}}
| {{mono|MATH RENDER ERROR}}
|}

The <nowiki>{{math}}</nowiki> template makes a big mess, and the {{mono|math}} tag makes the software totally give up. In my opinion, the best and simplest solution to this comes from a comment by {{noping|User:Jacobolus}} in the aforementioned discussion:

{{greentext|"Is there some way to explicitly separately set the COinS metadata instead of having it simply pull from whatever markup is used inside the various template parameters? If not, perhaps there should be."}}


To close out this long post, I must ask: is this metadata still useful to anyone? [[Wikipedia talk:COinS#Unmaintained standard|One discussion from 2024]] claims that Wikipedia is using this metadata in a way that nobody else does, and suggests that COinS in general is outdated. Is this true? Should we get rid of COinS entirely?

The following pages have been notified of this discussion:
* [[Wikipedia talk:COinS]]
* [[Template talk:Interlanguage link]]
* [[Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)]]

<span class="nowrap">–[[User:CopperyMarrow15#top|CopperyMarrow15]]</span> <small><span class="nowrap">([[User talk:CopperyMarrow15#top|talk]] '''⋅''' [[Special:Contributions/CopperyMarrow15|edits]])</span></small> 04:41, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

:As far as I can see, using &lt;math&gt; in place of the math templates is even worse, putting MATH+RENDER+ERROR into the COINS metadata. So there are no options for validly formatting citations of works that have formulas in their titles and generating unpolluted COINS, even if generating unpolluted COINS were a worthwhile thing to do. (In general, both &lt;math&gt; and {{tl|math}}/{{tl|mvar}} are needed: &lt;math&gt; can format complex expressions that {{tl|math}} cannot, but for reference titles for which {{tl|math}} suffices, it may be a better choice because it takes on the color of any internal or external link on the title whereas &lt;math&gt; stays black for many choices of math rendering preference.) See for example [[squared triangular number]] which has two examples of complicated &lt;math&gt; formulas in the reference titles (Benjamin and Stein) and two one more with {{tl|mvar}} (Garrett&Hummel and Warnaar). —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 05:02, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
::Indeed. This is exactly why I think Jacobolus's solution of simply letting the user manually write the COinS metadata is a good one. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CopperyMarrow15#top|CopperyMarrow15]]</span> <small><span class="nowrap">([[User talk:CopperyMarrow15#top|talk]] '''⋅''' [[Special:Contributions/CopperyMarrow15|edits]])</span></small> 05:08, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
:"Is this metadata still useful to anyone?"  Was it ever? Who uses it, where, and how—both on Wikipedia and elsewhere? Excuse my ignorance, but COinS seems like a source of 'pollution' itself. [[User:Ponor|Ponor]] ([[User talk:Ponor|talk]]) 05:47, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
::Presumably having machine-readable metadata could help some automatic scraping tools build a database of Wikipedia citations, for whatever purpose. I'm not sure whether anyone is actually using it for that though. –[[user:jacobolus|jacobolus]] [[user_talk:jacobolus|(t)]] 05:52, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
:::So it's probably useless for 99.99999…9% of our readers. Yet we're all receiving 300–500 hidden characters '''per reference''' in a format that, apparently, no one really cares about any more. Since scraping tools can scrape all that information from wikitext of individual pages or site dumps, I'd say - let's get rid of COinS. [[User:Ponor|Ponor]] ([[User talk:Ponor|talk]]) 07:18, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
::::I wouldn't mind getting rid of it. I doubt anyone would mourn the loss, but I'm not sure. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CopperyMarrow15#top|CopperyMarrow15]]</span> <small><span class="nowrap">([[User talk:CopperyMarrow15#top|talk]] '''⋅''' [[Special:Contributions/CopperyMarrow15|edits]])</span></small> 07:55, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
:Right now, there are big warnings on [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:COinS safe|many template documentation pages]] urging you not to pollute the COinS. I see no reason to stop providing COinS metadata, but I do think '''this is an issue of misaligned priorities.''' Polluting COinS is extremely trivial. Producing accurate human-readable citations is fairly important.
:Being able to generate machine-readable citation data might be somewhat important. Even if COinS is obsolete, any other citation generator would need similar clean field data, and thus would need similar limits on templates to get this clean metadata. However, at this point, I'm inclined to believe software is pretty good at parsing our human-readable citations, and can probably even find the right article from slightly inaccurate citations containing some garbled markup. Given that, '''I'm all for producing machine-readable citations as much as possible as long as this doesn't put any limits whatsoever on our ability to produce accurate human-readable citations.''' [[User:Daask|Daask]] ([[User talk:Daask|talk]]) 19:32, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
::It seems like we all agree that there should be no more pressure on editors to avoid templates because of COinS pollution. At the very least, the {{t|COinS safe}} banner should be either deleted or reworded to emphasize that scraping tools are not nearly as important as human readers. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CopperyMarrow15#top|CopperyMarrow15]]</span> <small><span class="nowrap">([[User talk:CopperyMarrow15#top|talk]] '''⋅''' [[Special:Contributions/CopperyMarrow15|edits]])</span></small> 04:39, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

== Please increase PMID limit ==

Hi there!  In the [[L-DOPA]] article, reference 28 shows a PMID error.  It uses a correct PMID value of 41408918, but the upper limit is 41400000 per [[Help:CS1 errors#bad pmid]].  Could someone please increase the PMID upper limit?  Thanks! [[User:GoingBatty|GoingBatty]] ([[User talk:GoingBatty|talk]]) 02:18, 19 December 2025 (UTC)
:Fixed by {{noping|Trappist the monk}} in [[c:Special:Diff/1133395568]]. [[User:Jlwoodwa|jlwoodwa]] ([[User talk:Jlwoodwa|talk]]) 06:40, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

== PMC limit needs to be increased ==

In the [[Breastfeeding]] article, references 118 and 119 show a PMC error. The PMC value of 12707856 is correct, although the limit is 12700000 per [[Help:CS1 errors#bad pmc]]. Could someone please increase the PMC upper limit? Thank you. [[User:Meltdown627|Meltdown627]] ([[User talk:Meltdown627|talk]]) 00:38, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
:Fixed by {{noping|Trappist the monk}} in [[c:Special:Diff/1133791636]]. [[User:Jlwoodwa|jlwoodwa]] ([[User talk:Jlwoodwa|talk]]) 09:28, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

== Preprint ==

In [[Joël Scherk]], the article by Cremmer, Julia, and Scherk was cited in this way:<br/><br/>
<code><nowiki>{{cite journal | last1=Cremmer | first1=E. | last2=Julia | first2=B. | last3=Scherk | first3=J. | title=Supergravity in theory in 11 dimensions | journal=Physics Letters B | publisher=Elsevier BV | volume=76 | issue=4 | year=1978 | issn=0370-2693 | doi=10.1016/0370-2693(78)90894-8 | pages=409–412| bibcode=1978PhLB...76..409C}}</nowiki></code><br/><br/>
The paper is not freely available. However there is a preprint freely available on the web, I cited it this way: <br/><br/>
<code><nowiki>[https://lib-extopc.kek.jp/preprints/PDF/1978/7805/7805106.pdf Preprint scanned document], LPTENS-78-10. {{retrieved|access-date=20 December 2025|via=[[KEK]]}}</nowiki></code>, right after {{tl|cite journal}}.<br/><br/>
I wonder whether there is a way to include the preprint version in {{tl|cite journal}}.-- [[User:Carnby|Carnby]] ([[User talk:Carnby|talk]]) 11:32, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

:What you've done is the correct way to mention the preprint, there's no direct way to add the preprint to the cite. -- <small>LCU</small> '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|A<small>ctively</small>D<small>isinterested</small>]]''' <small>''«[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|@]]» °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|∆t]]°''</small> 21:04, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

== Links break with vertical bars in source URL ==

I've come across a website that hosts a queryable database of tornado records, which is useful for certain tornado articles since a similar website went offline a few years ago. One issue I ran into is that the URLs that come from these queries ([https://tornadoarchive.com/home/tornado-archive-data-explorer/#interval=2014-06-16T12:00Z;2014-06-17T12:00Z&map=-88.0102;39.0819;4.87&env_src=null&env_type=null&domain=North%20America&filters=partition|PartitionFilter|f_scale|(E)FU,(E)F0,(E)F1,(E)F2,(E)F3,(E)F4,(E)F5 example]) contain vertical bars: "|". When the URL is added to an inline citation, the bars register as part of the template, which breaks the link. I did see that replacing "|" with "%7C" makes the link work, but doing this manually for multiple queries across multiple articles would get tedious. Is there a template or something else that would either automate this conversion or allow the link to work with the vertical bars? [[User:TornadoLGS|TornadoLGS]] ([[User talk:TornadoLGS|talk]]) 03:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
:You might add this to your common.js:
::<syntaxhighlight lang="javascript">/**
 * TemplateScript adds configurable templates and scripts to the sidebar, and adds an example regex editor.
 * @see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/TemplateScript
 */

mw.config.set('userjs-templatescript', { regexEditor: false });					// disable the regex editor
if ($.inArray(mw.config.get('wgAction'), ['edit', 'submit']) !== -1) {
	$.ajax(
		'//tools-static.wmflabs.org/meta/scripts/pathoschild.templatescript.js',
		{dataType: 'script', cache: true}
	).done(function () {
		var add = function() {
		return mw.util.addPortletLink.apply(mw.util, arguments);
		};

	pathoschild.TemplateScript.add (
		{
		name:'tornado archive',
		script: function (editor) 
			{
			editor.replaceSelection (function (selected)
				{
				return selected.replace (/\|/g, '%7C');							// percent encode pipes
				});
			}
		});
	});
}</syntaxhighlight>
:With Vector Legacy skin, this js adds a TemplateScript label and a 'tornado archive' link to the left-side menu.  Using the source editor, click and drag to highlight the offending url.  Click the 'tornado archive' link to percent encode the pipe characters in the url.
:
:Not tested with other skins or other editors.
:—[[User:Trappist the monk|Trappist the monk]] ([[User talk:Trappist the monk|talk]]) 13:05, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Trappist the monk}} Thank you! A lovely little Christmas present even. I [[User:TornadoLGS/sandbox#Tornado Archive tests|tested it out]]. Syntax highlighting needs to be off for it to work, but I also found it can do multiple URLs at once. [[User:TornadoLGS|TornadoLGS]] ([[User talk:TornadoLGS|talk]]) 22:31, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

== orig-year ==

[[Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities]] has gone through 20 editions, many additions from edition to edition. Editions have been separated by anything from 5 years to 15 years. 1st edition was published in 1879, and the most recent (20th) in 1991. When citing the 20th, should the orig-year be used at all?[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 03:17, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

* For dictionaries and encyclopedias generally I would say no, because it's not useful; they change too much between editions for the 1st edition year to be relevant in a citation of later editions. Current usage ignores it: {{tlx|cite OED}} doesn't use {{para|orig-year|1st ed. 1884}}, and I don't recall seeing "''Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders'' ... [1st ed. 1954]" or "''Encyclopædia Britannica'' ... [1st ed. 1768]". [[User:Hairy Dude|Hairy Dude]] ([[User talk:Hairy Dude|talk]]) 14:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
::That's appears to be the way we are thinking over at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities]]. Although called a "Manual", it is closer to a one volume encyclopedia, but without the need to specify specific authorship of individual articles and the wikiproject has generally used cite book. btw, our first use of it as a template is at [[:Template:Bairds20]]. We intend to make templates for most if not all of the editions. (certainly for everything 1905 and later)[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 16:44, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

==Generic names==
Please add "bureau", 'desk", "news", and "correspondent" to the list of generic names at Category:CS1_errors:_generic_name.  These are sometimes used as parts of names, such as "Sports Correspondent" or "News Desk", but aren't legitimate authors' names.  Thanks. [[User:Ira Leviton|Ira Leviton]] ([[User talk:Ira Leviton|talk]]) 19:26, 25 December 2025 (UTC)