Template talk:Cite

message: How is this template a self-reference?  It's used for displaying cite/source information, which is definitely part of the article content.  I'm removing the selfref notice ... call me out on it if I did something stupid.  --Cyde Weys 02:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-ref? 

message: Most citation templates have an accessdate field, which differs from the date field. I thought I should post this note before adding one to the template, but I think it's a critical field to include, since stuff comes & goes from the Web. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Accessdate?

message: There is a flaw in this template: how does one cite specific editions of a work? Right now I'm faced with an instance of this template which I may have to remove & replace with a plain textual bibliographic citation -- which I'd honestly rather not do. But if this template doesn't fit, then I'll have to do that more & more. -- llywrch 23:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have created User:Shoons/Cite as follows. I wonder if this kind of approach can help you. Let me know.--Shoons 03:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple editions? 

message: I created User:Shoons/Cite so that everybody can use this convenient Template:Cite. Please let me know what you think.--Shoons 03:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Shoons/Cite]]

message: *When looking at an article in print preview, i noticed that long urls used in references are not wrapped to the next line.  For example, just try to view this page in print preview (click here) and you will see that the url just goes on and on within the same line in the Reference section. testtest1test2testtest2hihohaheh  -Nima Baghaei talk · cont · email 21:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  long url(s) do not get wrapped to next line 

message: As the new MOS standards recommend de-linking dates, perhaps the cite templates could be updated so the access date is no longer automatically linked? Perhaps the auto-formatting could be kept in some way but without the link - especially as it has even less use in this occasion than most despite being one of the most common uses.- J.Logan`t: 18:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  mos dates 

message: Instead of listing these tools how about a link to Wikipedia:Citing_Sources#Citation_creation_tools instead? LeeVJ (talk) 22:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  useful links 

message: The cite generator can’t be found. — Richie 18:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite generator 404 

message: Per MOS:SYL, the linking of dates purely for the purpose of autoformatting is now deprecated. This cite template automatically links the dates, and is incorrect, and I am requesting a change in the template to reflect the policy. DiverseMentality(Boo!) 20:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ~ L'Aquatique[talk] 05:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linked dates 

message: Do we need some MediaWiki extension if we want to add the Template: Cite to our wiki? We have copy/pasted the code, but it does not work. 
Thank you! Sabina Podjed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.61.72.202 (talk) 20:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone have the answer to this question?? Thansk Jez ☎ ✉ ✍ 15:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension? 

message: I made some changes to :Template:Cite/doc, but without a refresh, it will not display correctly when referenced by :Template:Cite (it displays the pre-edited version.) 
Happy Editing! —  16:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: … never mind … it's fixed now. :-) — 72.75.108.10 (talk) 00:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need edit to refresh documentation 

message: Please replace this template's code with a redirect to Template:Citation.  This will help to provide a consistent citation output and metadata with no loss of functionality. Thanks,  Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 23:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The names of the parameters are different, so this won't work without further preparation (people splitting names into last and first, checking how to link etc.). Kusma (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it will. Loss of publisher auto-linking is a good thing as many publishers may be at, e.g. CUP (publisher). Please prove me wrong by providing an example that doesn't work. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 22:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I suspected there don't appear to be any cases where redirecting to Template:Citation won't work.  Therefore I've re-enabled the editprotected request. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 14:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done At first it looked like the parameters wouldn't match up, but actually  has all of the parameters that  had, and many more, so I've redirected it.--Aervanath (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger request

message: The discussion that was posted here has been moved to the correct page, Template talk:Citation/Archive 5#Edit request. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: Template:Cite redirects to Template:Citation. Why does this page not similarly redirect to Template talk:Citation? It means that we have two discussion pages for one template. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  No redirect