Template talk:Cite journal/Archive 2

message: Given that few papers are written by a single author anymore, can we please see an example for two authors? (Smith, Josef and Moroni, Angel, 1830) would be fine. I took a guess at Otter theorem prover, but I'm not to happy with the result.--Stephan Schulz 20:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at  but only if you're happy about looking at extremely complicated code :-) HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 14:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scratching my head: the code for the author part is the same here as in cite book. So what's more complicated there than here? --Ligulem 15:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops. Gracefool! WTF! I've seen it. --Ligulem 15:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  See my ramblings about "sub-templates" below. —Phil | Talk 15:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example with two authors 

message: Should we add an optional parameter JournalURL?
I'm coming across quite a few places where the Journal parameter contains a URL, and I wonder whether we should add an extra parameter for this.
We could also add an optional parameter JournalLink where we have an article (along the lines of the new , the …Link parameter would over-ride the …URL parameter).
I'm actually wondering whether we could make an argument that an actual meta-template would be useful here.
We have many instances where we have X together with optional X…URL and X…Link, and we want to treat them basically in the same way; like this, in decreasing order of desirability:
* X…Link ⇒ X
* X…URL ⇒ [X…URL X]
* X
It would be nice if we could come up with something which would do this consistently, and the problem is that my ingrained programmer's habits say "sub-routine" which in this case rather implies "sub-template".
Thoughts?
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 14:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm unsure what to do with your proposal right now. Maybe I haven't understood it. This needs some further rumination from my side. It's not an easy question. Generally I'm reluctant to add additional parameters. A quick first sight problem I see is there are more and more occasions where such requests for additional url param's do pop up on the citation templates. I fear a bit piling up of paramaters. Adding parameters is easy, but once we have them in the template it's nearly impossible to remove them even if they are only used on a few calls among thousands of other calls. But generally, if there is a good reason to add a parameter, then it should be done. --Ligulem 09:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've (sort of) included the journal URL by linking to the wikipedia journal entry, which itself has the journal links.  For example use: journal=J. Org. Chem.   This will link via redirect to the Journal of Organic Chemistry, where all the relevant journal links are listed. (This has the added benefit of being able to use annoying journal title abbreviations without having to fully spell them out or explain them.) ~K 20:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JournalURL 

message: I note that the authorlink field applies only to the first author. To be honest I'm a little ambivalent about wikilinking author names at all (I think it looks kind of ugly) but surely if we're going to do it, it should be possible for all authors. In many fields it's traditional to list authors alphabetically, so it's not even clear that the first author is the one with the most important contribution to the cite. Maybe the remaining authors should be included as first2, last2, authorlink2, and so on? In that case we could also make sure that the Oxford comma is always used. --Trovatore 19:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: linking coauthors

message: I hope I am not at the wronf place to ask. Should this or other templates be used to cite a newspaper, a daily (like NYT) or a weekly (like The Village Voice). Thanks. --Irpen 05:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to look at  as well. --Stemonitis 09:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Newspaper

message: The article on AIDS has been nominated for FA status, yet the first comment in place is about the wikitext. It is called a perfect example of what best practice isn't. AIDS extensively uses this template along with the cite book and cite web templates within the text. This makes for better reading and better referencing. Just thought people should know. --Bob 00:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not the templates' fault. It is the fault of the <ref> system (see m:Cite/Cite.php) which requires that references be inline in the text rather than collected together at the end of the article. -Splashtalk 01:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Using the <ref name="example> style, you could theoretically have them all at the top, or maybe at the bottom, and just reference them like that. They do not strictly have to be inline is what I am saying. Ansell 23:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/AIDS/archive1]]

message: I was thinking about this all along. I thought the most natural system would be something like this:
*<ref name=ABC> in the text flow
*<ref ABC>}     in the end after the  entry
*... And the software orders the refs in the end if the sentences and paragraphs are moved around in the article and when this is being done, we don't need to move the text of the ref itself.
When I saw Cite.php I thought I didn't find what I need and kept looking for something LATEX-like. Surprised was me that I didn't find a system I was looking for. The requirement to use inline is rather inconvenient. Using Harvard system, as of now, requires reordering everything manually in the ref list every time the refs are moved around (or it doesn't? Pls correct me then). Is there a plan for a more LaTeX-like version of cite.php? Thanks, --Irpen 01:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it does and no there's not is the short answer! Various suggestions have been made about Cite.php but so far, there has been no clear way ahead. Somebody with the MediaWiki knowledge really needs to dive in and just implement it one way or another. In fact, Cite.php works pretty well in shortish articles where there are not too many references but it does rather collapse under its own weight in more major undertakings. -Splashtalk 01:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What would be nice to have in or in addition to cite.php

message: I've added a new param "accessdate". I need this to migrate inclusions of deprecated  to cite journal. The new accessdate is compatible with the ISO accessdate variant of  and . --Ligulem 22:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New accessdate param 

message: I have finally gotten around to performing the history merge mandated by the long-ago TfD on Template:Journal reference. Thus the templates' histories are merged up until just before the deprecation of Template:Journal reference where Template:Cite journal takes over. I think that adding mere procedural tags does not result in any copyright claim and so the deletion of those few overlapping revisions does not violate any GFDL rights. Also per the TfD, I have archived Template talk:Journal reference at Template talk:Cite journal/Template:Journal reference talk archive. -Splashtalk 00:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Beautiful. I hope when  goes to the great template scrapyard in the sky the same thing will happen, then I will gone down in history as the inventor of the original referencing template! (And boy, haven't we come on since then!) Pcb21 Pete 13:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History merge finally carried out 

message: At the end of the article title there is a period added by this template. This makes it look silly when there is a url link to the article embedded, or if there is an exclamation or interrogation point in the title. Could this be modified so that the users add this period if required? --Bob 20:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Period

message: Please check out the refs in inositol.  The first ref breaks the line right after the caret.  Is this from "cite journal" or from "cite.php"? --Slashme 13:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor linebreak bug 

message: Why does this template have quotation marks at all? This is not consistent with most references on Wikipedia and I've never seen this used in any journal. Can we remove them? And get rid of the "curly" parameter in the process? JFW | T@lk 11:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you read the discussions above on this talk page? --Ligulem 12:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation marks 

message: We're discussing what a more integrated template could look like: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Unreferenced GA#New template proposed. Please comment if you wish. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 19:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New template proposed: distinguishing news vs. abstract vs. full text 

message: I've copied the documentation back to the talk page. Please remove it from the template page. I don't want do ask an admin for every tweak to the docu. If you disagree, update the template page docu yourself accordingly whenever needed. Thanks. --Ligulem 11:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. older ≠ wiser 13:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation back on talk page 

message: I'm trying to cite an article which has three seperate dates: date of acceptance, Epub (available online) date, and the date it will appear in print. Am I correct to use the Epub? --Oldak Quill 14:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd use the print paper references (e.g. volume, issue, pages, as the base template is aimed at paper references), and then just link to the epub. I don't think it's pertinent to give both dates, but adding the accessdate param is pertinent. even though mostpapers have an "acceptance date", they are almost never given in references (except for papers awaiting publication,but here we have a web copy). What's the wiki article? I can give an extra look into it. Circeus 15:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date - e-pub or pub 

message: The closing curly quote is wrong. At the moment it is “, but should be ”. The fix is a trivial replacement of the first character by the second character in exactly one place. —xyzzyn 22:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. —Ruud 00:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix curly quotes 

message: Not finding a good citation template for magazines which aren't journals (but are, IMHO, sufficiently reliable sources, such as Wine Spectator on the subject of wine), I've been using cite journal for those.  Comments, or is there any reason that this template should be reserved for peer reviewed scientific publications? --EngineerScotty 18:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Often, I will use Template:Cite news for magazines that are not scientific journals.  Whether that is a proper use is debatable, though.  --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use for magazine articles 

message: Should the journal name be wikilinked, or left as it is? I would argue that it does want to be linked, so that people who haven't heard of the journal in question can go to a page describing it (and hopefully linking to it). As it stands, this doesn't seem to be common practice, and isn't encouraged here, though. Mike Peel 19:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Encourage use of "id=" as well, since we can't rely on a journal having its own article. --KSmrqT 20:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is now issn=0031-9007. — Omegatron 00:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I took to wikilinking the journal name at one time.  My argument to myself was that this would provide a ready way of pulling back all articles that contain citations from a particular journal.  I've since stopped because I think more elegant solutions to this surveillance problem should be crafted. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikilink the journal name? 

message: Any reason why the publishing house/school/organization etc. is not an option to list? Marskell 06:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publishing org 

message: I've prepared template:cite journal/doc to apply the template doc page pattern for cite journal. Please replace the content of template:cite journal with exactly this code (please copy it verbatim). Thanks. --Ligulem 22:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done!  Thanks for doing this; I'm in the process of working on this too. JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request: template doc page pattern 

message: I keep coming across journal entries in foreign languages (e.g. most of Einstein's work), and would like to see a way of having a translated title included in the template, for example in the form "Foreign title (trans. English title)", as well as the possibility of linking to both an english and foreign language version of the journal article. What do people here think? Mike Peel 10:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign language journal titles - translation parameter? 

message: Why is the author boldfaced?  This is not a style I am familiar with, and I find it visually jarring and unnecessary. --Macrakis 15:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't. --Ligulem 16:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Boldface author

message: please add the link to italian version it:Template:Cite journal  --BMF81 10:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. But you could have done that yourself. Interwikis can be added on Template:Cite journal/doc, which is not protected (scroll to the bottom). --Ligulem 12:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwikie 

message: Using "date=Summer 1982" which is the official date on the journal issue I'm referencing, I get this:
(Summer 1982)"Disney Releases 10 Titles on Laser Videodisc". VIDEODISC/VIDEOTEX 2 (3): 175.
I'm not sure if it's because this is not a conventional full date, but there needs to be a space after the ")" (and maybe a period plus a space). The live example is at Walt_Disney_Home_Entertainment. Can this be fixed? Canadiana 15:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm having a look.  --Ligulem 23:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It sure has nothing to do with the unconventional date. I would rather say the missing author is unconventional. But per the spec this is a valid call pattern ("title is the only required parameter"). So the missing space looks like a plain bug (damn spaces, grumble...) --Ligulem 00:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: So definitely a bug. I will have a look. Maybe tomorrow. --Ligulem 00:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Think I got it: . I would say: Fixed. --Ligulem 00:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Addendum: I've omitted the period after the date if there is no author (). Which is now the same as in . --Ligulem 00:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought about the lack of author being a problem before, but it didn't seem the most obvious possibility.  It's a bit unusual for a journal article not to have an author, but this is from a section called "News and Notes" and there are no authors for these items.  Anyway, thanks very much for tracking down the bug so quickly. Canadiana 04:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date for quarterly publication 

message: I'd like to change this template and cite book.  I want to add COinS tags for automated programs to retrieve reference data, and I want to separate ISSN, PMI, DOI into separate fields to make things like this easier.
Discuss on cite book. — Omegatron 06:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  COinS tags for machine-readable metadata