Wikipedia talk:Citation templates/Archive 2

message: How do I cite a T.V show? and is there a tag I could use?--Lucy-marie 23:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV shows 

message: </div>
:::Thanks! That was really helpful. — Ravikiran 04:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: How can I cite source code? Visor 22:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would you need to do that? — Omegatron 22:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source code? 

message: Which, if any, of these citation templates should be used to cite a news paper? TomStar81 (Talk) 21:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: would be my choice. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 22:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspaper 

message: Anyone care to recommend how I cite a CD? I'm referring to the lyrics on a track on the CD.
Ashley VH 07:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ? — Omegatron 22:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite Music, CD, LP 

message: An article for speedy deletion tag on the grounds of pure vandalism and a content totally disputed tag were recently added to this page by an anonymous user. I reverted them both on the premis that they were added as vandalism, and that the normal protocol for not deleting deletion tags did not apply in this situation.
If you disagree, feel free to restore that tags.
perfectblue 18:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AFD - Explanation

message: We're missing a template for citing mailing list archives, and they are cited pretty often in computing/software-related articles. Currently,  is typically used, but I think the  template should be generalized to also work for mailing lists, as they are very often used for analogous purposes and mailing lists are also sometimes mirrored on Usenet. -- intgr 10:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only public mailing lists would be acceptable sources, I believe.  It should also be extended to cover discussion boards, forums, etc. — Omegatron 22:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citing mailing lists

message: Why isn't edition given as part of the citation template of a book? I see edition mentioned once in the archive: 
Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/Sources_of_articles/Generic_citations/Archive_01#Book_.26_journal_template_suggestions
but evidently this was not taken seriously or (at least) is not being shown in the templates. The edition of a book often makes a great deal of difference when you are trying to locate specific material. --Ben Best 20:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: and alternatively  handle edition information.--Ling.Nut 20:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

text: PS so does , according to its documentation.--Ling.Nut 20:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edition ?

message: This must exist.  I'm looking for a template that contains a listing of all the parameters of all the other templates, so you can put it in your article, Preview, and copy and paste the bare template you want, instead of opening up a separate page for each one to copy and paste from. — Omegatron 17:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ummmm, not sure.. but that sounds like something that should be on someone's to do list. Perhaps I can help in a couple weeks, but it's final exams time now. --Ling.Nut 18:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of templates 

message: If you just type  by itself, it just says , bceause the title field is mandatory.  What it should do is show you the full citation template with all of the possible parameters for copying and pasting.   So you'd go:
# Edit the page
# Type 
# Push preview
# Copy from the preview the full {{cite book|title=|author=... bare template
# Paste over the original you typed
# Fill in the blanks — Omegatron 05:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better idea 

message: How do you cite letters like a letter from the President to Congress? Sam D Ware 20:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't have a template for that. There are quite a few things for which we don't have a template, and even where we have a template, many footnotes need additional material following the template. My suggestion is that you just make sure that you cite it clearly and unambiguously; if a copy is available on line, your citation should include a link, but it should also read clearly to anyone who does not follow the link. - Jmabel | Talk 06:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CITE Letters

message: I would say it is highly advisable that these templates should be substituted.  Not only are these templated incredibly bulky in the edit window, but there is very little value for them to not be subst'd considering the bandwith issue.  I think we should start contemplating making the substitution of these templates mandatory.--Esprit15d  (talk ¤ contribs) 13:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say it is highly inadvisable that these templates be substituted.  Do you have a good reason for them to be? — Omegatron 14:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Oppose: What "bandwidth issue"? Not substituting templates does not incur any bandwidth overhead. I also don't think substituting them would be a good idea, as the templates could not be updated later in that case. -- intgr 14:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Conditional code (such as in the cite templates) often doesn't subst nicely. Just look at most vandal warnings. Gimmetrow 15:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a bug filed fro this already. Circeus 16:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

text: One of the primary values of these templates is that if changes are needed to the format, all articles will reflect those changes and maintain a consistant appearance.  There is no sense in subst'ing...little good can come from it in this situation. -- Huntster T • @ • C 20:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Substitution 

message: It is ready, here. -- Lonewolf BC 02:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This system has been in use for a long time, and is used on a large number of articles already, as have similar systems, e.g. author-date ones. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that you are mistaken as to the system being proposed, whereas I have not seen it used in any article I have come across, aside from the ones for which I have used it.  Its components are already in widespread use, and it uses familiar forms of citation.  The only innovation (assuming it to be an innovation) is to use the templates outside of the body of the text, rather than inside.  This is not the way they are generally used, unless the sample of articles which I have seen is somehow altogether unrepresentative of WP articles.  If you know of other articles using this system, please point them out to me.  I very much wish to make contact with anyone else using the same system, with an eye toward making it better known and put into general use.-- Lonewolf BC 07:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More or less equivalent systems are used (at least intermittently) in Blaise Pascal, Point Park Civic Center, and Federalist No. 10, Pericles, Alcibiades, and many other articles that use author-page type citations. Whether they use the citation templates at all I am not sure, but this is not of great importance. Christopher Parham (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for giving those examples.  No, I'm sorry to say that those are not using the system proposed.  They are using a similar style of citing references, but the proposed system does not seek to innovate so far as that goes, so of course it uses familar forms.  Rather, the proposed system is essentially a way of getting citation templates, on the one hand, and the ... and  programming ("cite.php", I believe it is called), on the other hand, to work together, each to full advantage, without the unwanted side-effect of cluttering up the bodies of articles with long citations.  So the proposal is not so much formal as ... I guess meta-technical is the word for it.  That is, the idea is to put the existing technical tools to better use.-- Lonewolf BC 08:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether a formal harvard citation with date system or the article title (which can be used for similar content according to Chicago, IIRC) is not very relevant to saying it is the "same system". Look at Vijayanagara Empire. It is pretty much the same (the only difference is that is a few cases, I couldn't tell the exact meaning of the original citation, so they are not pure Harvard.) Circeus 13:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

text: (reducing indent) I do a whole lot of citation fixing, and I must say, I looked at your Demo page and it looks like a damn fine idea. Only took a quick look, but I'd say, go for it. A suggestion: if you want widespread adoption, it would be best to develop some kind of tool that converts existing pages. Also, maybe it would be a good idea to try it out on some popular pages, and see what kind of reaction it gets. Just my 2...or 3...cents...-Pete 08:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demonstration Page 

message: Try Template:Cite court as a starting point.  I am aware that it inserts a comma ahead of pinpoint citations, while the proposed AALL Universal Citation Guide uses a paragraph symbol.  The first version is based on what is in Case citation.  Fix it up and remove the EXPERIMENTAL header.  (SEWilco 20:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Cite court 

message: I would also like to request your assistance if its not too much trouble? Please take a look at Shilpa_Shetty#Obscene_Pictures; why are the references for that section pointing to earlier references listed for other sections of the article? Quoting the same reference several times seems to work fine in the Romanov Vodka section, so why not elsewhere? I've tried verifying the syntax and it is correct, maybe it is an issue with the template itself? Thanks in advance. Ekantik talk 03:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like the problem has been solved, or at least, I cannot find anything wrong.  Can you elaborate? -- Huntster T • @ • C 06:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Shilpa Shetty

message: Hey, I'm not sure if this has been discussed, but I have made a reference from a magazine using the journal citation (wrong, I know, but it seemed the most correct). Now the citation will not go to the footnotes, it just sits in the body text - it is not even superscript or anything. What am I doing wrong? The article in question is Peter Canavan - the section is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Canavan#Under_Age. The third paragraph of this subheading (under-age) the last few words.--Macca7174 01:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey there.  You had left out the  tags.  Everything should be fixed up. -- Huntster T • @ • C 01:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, cheers.  I would have thought that was already included in the template. Thanks anyway.--Macca7174 18:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The citation is the description of the source.  A reference (footnote) to the citation is what connects the text to the citation.  The citation is the rose, and the reference is your pointing at the rose. (SEWilco 06:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The ref doesn't become a footnote?? 

message: why doesn't any of the templates at Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine appear here? and would you answer my questions on the talk page's newest discussion? trespassers william 21:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wayback machine 

message: I'd appreciate some comments at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#Tool to format citations. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 07:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool to format citations 

message: I just made Template:cite BDE (Brooklyn Daily Eagle); see it in action on Long Island Rail Road. (Also, if anyone can find a better page URL to link to that will pop up the articles properly, please fix it.) --NE2 06:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate to say this, but your template is rather unnecessary.  One would just use  or  to link to those resources.  Both provide the functionality to link to a website, so I don't see the immediate purpose of having a dedicated template for that single newspaper.  What does yours do that the available templates here don't? -- Huntster T • @ • C 11:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Due to the long URL, this makes the text a lot smaller and easier to edit. --NE2 12:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: That newspaper's archives use URLs with the year and date, so the BDE template assembles the URL when given the date.  It's a shame there isn't a standard URL format for such archives.  The BDE template requires the date be in a certain format; would Wikipedia's date formatting maintain the original format of the date, or might the template end up being given a reformatted date?  (SEWilco 17:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that it's a U.S. newspaper, I don't think it's a problem to use U.S. date format. But I see what you mean - I would doubt that the date preferences are applied until after everything is processed. I changed my preferences and it works exactly as expected: "Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 1851 July 5, page 4" By the way, if anyone wants to make this use one of the other templates for a consistent "look and feel", feel free. --NE2 23:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Can someone add this one to the list?

message: I've left comments at Template talk:Cite web, and Template talk:Cite journal, and would like to also make the suggestion here. Template:Cite web currently allows the user to either use accessdate (with the date required to be in ISO form) or accessmonthday and accessyear (with the date in the form "Month DD" and "YYYY", which produces an unwikilinked "Month DD, YYYY"). I would like it to allow a new date format, perhaps by adding a new parameter accessdaymonth, which would allow the date to show up as an unwikilinked "DD Month YYYY", which some people find is the best date format in "serious" writing. Template:Cite journal currently has only the accessdate parameter with no allowance for other date forms, and would require all three parameters to be added. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 20:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both will work, but "accessdate" seems to be the standard in all of the citation templates.  I'd advise simply using accessdate, to avoid confusing those that aren't as familiar, but it really doesn't matter. -- Huntster T • @ • C 04:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: If accessdate is the prefered keyword, maybe the article should be changed to reflect that by changing occrrences of access-date to the prefered keyword name.  In a separate matter, I guess that a robot could fix up occurrences of access-date in the whole of the encyclopedia if ever that was needed.  Thanks for the reply. -Lastingwar 15:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the hyphen from the table. –Pomte 16:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks very much to all of you who clarified this matter and fixed the page to reflect a uniform usage. -Lastingwar 01:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Access date usage 

message: For "website" citation templates using the "Citation" template type. there appears to be two different names for the "access date" keyword.  One name is accessdate and the other is access-date.  Question: Which is correct?  Or are both acceptable (which appears to be the case)? -Lastingwar 03:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both will work, but "accessdate" seems to be the standard in all of the citation templates.  I'd advise simply using accessdate, to avoid confusing those that aren't as familiar, but it really doesn't matter. -- Huntster T • @ • C 04:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: If accessdate is the prefered keyword, maybe the article should be changed to reflect that by changing occrrences of access-date to the prefered keyword name.  In a separate matter, I guess that a robot could fix up occurrences of access-date in the whole of the encyclopedia if ever that was needed.  Thanks for the reply. -Lastingwar 15:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the hyphen from the table. –Pomte 16:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks very much to all of you who clarified this matter and fixed the page to reflect a uniform usage. -Lastingwar 01:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: keyword name

message: I thought that VPR was the right place, so I started the discussion there. (go)
Anyone have anything else to add? --Random832(tc) 14:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cite newsgroup change 

message: Do you think it would be reasonable to have "language" field in cite book template? Several BibTeX styles do have such a field. --Kompik 09:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. Such a field should exist for citing sources in languages other than English. I'll see if I can change the template myself. Galanskov 19:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hold on. I just took a look at Template:Cite book. It appears to already have such a field, but this page dosen't mention it. Galanskov 19:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: language field in cite book

message: Hi, I would like to cite an academic paper that is published as an academic anthology by Oxford University Press i.e.: "This author" in "This paper" published in "This book" edited by "these professors" scenario. Which of the citation templates would best assist me in doing this? Could/Should a new template be designed to accomodate this type of scholarly reference? Ekantik talk 03:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: with "chapter" and using "editor" for... well... the editors. If the book (assuming it's a ISBN-tagged monography) is part of a series (especially if said series itself has an ISSN), you can use the "series" variable (e.g. |series=Devellopments in foobarium research, 14). Circeus 04:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citing academic anthologies?

message: Is there a template or model suitable for citing a brochure?  I have in mine in particular brochures released by CERN about an experiment there. -- SCZenz 14:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing brochures 

message: Are the any styles for the citation templates —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fnielsen (talk • contribs) 10:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style of citation markup 

message: I see that a cite video template has been added - but does anyone have any idea how i should cite some mp3 audio files? I want to use this on Bristol Riots to cite an mp3 of a lecture which was delivered on the subject by Mike Manson. I will cite the web page for now bu the actual items of interest such as the exact date, number killed etc comes from the audio files.— Rod talk 14:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Use the "format" parameter and link directly to the MP3?Circeus 22:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cite audio 

message: Would anyone object to my creating a  template? Maps have special requirements, such as the map publisher/branding, the company who did the actual cartography, and (possibly) the map coordinate of the data referenced (e.g. A6), that other templates don't cover.—Scott5114↗ 17:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds good, just don't know how much immediately use it will find :)  -- Huntster T • @ • C 23:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know WP:USRD will put it to use :) I've created it - would anyone like to check the syntax to make sure it's consistent with the other citation templates? —Scott5114↗ 01:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite map? 

message: Could someone possibly add this template into the list? I had a hard time finding it (i needed it for radio recordings) and I am afraid I may mess up this article if i try to add it in myself (:O) -Nima Baghaei talk · cont · email 15:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'll take care of it.  I'm probably going to do a code update of the article while I'm at it. -- Huntster T • @ • C 19:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Template:Cite episode]] 

message: The "cite" family of templates, as well as "citation", are variable in providing "publisher" and "location" parameters, yet these are very important, especially for references published outside of the USA and Canada.
* Template:Citation provides both.
* Template:Cite book provides both parameters.
* Template:Cite journal provides neither (and the text in Wikipedia:Citation_templates says it provides publisher.)
* Template:Cite conference provides both.
* Template:Cite encyclopedia provides only publisher.
* Template:Cite news provides only publisher.
* Template:Cite web provides only publisher.  Even for a web service, there's sometimes reason to reference a location.
* Template:Cite newsgroup provides neither.  Since there are multiple disconnected networks using the USENET/NNTP protocols, at least a publisher parameter is required, and location might have some use as well.
* Template:Cite paper provides only publisher.
* Template:Cite press release provides only publishers.
* Template:Cite video provides both, and a good thing, too--obscure videos can be very hard to find.  "Producer" and "director" might also be desirable.
* Template:Cite episode doesn't have them; doesn't (seem to) need them.
* Template:Cite court doesn't have them; doesn't seem to need them.  Unfortunately, "cite court" is probably US-specific.
* Template:Cite mailing list doesn't provide publisher or location (e-mail lists do sometimes have publishers), and it only supports lists with URLs, which omits plain Majordomo and LISTSERV mailing lists.
My suggestion is to uniformly provide "publisher" and "location" parameters in all citation templates.
Randwolf 16:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Seconding (glad I saw Randwolf's note, thank you). :Template:Cite journal had a publisher field according to :WP:CITET. I removed it for now to maybe help others avoid a trip to the Village Pump. -Susanlesch 18:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publisher and location parameters desired 

message: I will use whatever format is preferred by editors.  I have noticed that some people name the references.  I have tried to do this without much success so I just repeat the same citation.  How should the citations be named?  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cherylyoung (talk • contribs) 00:44, 1 May 2007   (UTC)
:When naming references, you have to use <ref name="whatever">{{cite... for the first instance, where whatever is any unique name you want to give it.  Each following instance, you need to use just .  Note the trailing slash mark, this is important. -- Huntster T • @ • C 08:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming references 

message: This page gives links to Template:Harvard reference which now begins "THIS TEMPLATE IS DEPRECATED. USE Template:Citation INSTEAD, WHICH HAS THE SAME FUNCTIONALITY." Should this page not be updated? Also, both this page and Wikipedia:Citing sources begin by suggesting Template:Cite book etc. which appear to lack that functionality, with the result that pages such as Alfred Russel Wallace are produced using that template in a Harvard system without the links down to the references. It seems desirable to encourage standardising on Template:Citation unless there's a good reason otherwise, and this would suggest showing that template at the outset. ...... dave souza, talk 21:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Harvard reference section is redundant. I just removed it. COGDEN 08:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good start. However, the "cite book" type versions are still shown as the first option in each case, implying first preference. I've added a couple of notes to make it clear that the "citation" template works better with Harvard referencing. Certainly the linking function did not work with "cite book" when I tried it out. Altering the sequence in the table would be helpful. .. dave souza, talk 12:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:Harvard reference obsolete?