Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Page cite"
Steve98052 (talk | contribs) (→More parameters: new section) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Notes (2018) == | == Notes (2018) == | ||
| − | Can we not add the "pages/s" text to this template. It looks terrible and makes the resulting citations difficult to read. Also please don't add unnecessary spaces into these templates. It messes up every page to which they are attached. [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 06:27, 6 June 2018 (EDT) | + | Can we not add the "pages/s" text to this template. It looks terrible and makes the resulting citations difficult to read. Also please don't add unnecessary spaces into these templates. It messes up every page to which they are attached. |
| + | : - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 06:27, 6 June 2018 (EDT) | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| − | :: I'm glad my advice is so valued. I'm going to remove the "page/s" test and make the return the citations to their former, pristine state. [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 08:11, 6 June 2018 (EDT) | + | :: I'm glad my advice is so valued. I'm going to remove the "page/s" test and make the return the citations to their former, pristine state. |
| + | : - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 08:11, 6 June 2018 (EDT) | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| Line 15: | Line 17: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| − | Seriously, why are we adding this? [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 06:37, 7 June 2018 (EDT) | + | Seriously, why are we adding this? |
| + | : - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 06:37, 7 June 2018 (EDT) | ||
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 08:11, 11 September 2019
Notes (2018)
Can we not add the "pages/s" text to this template. It looks terrible and makes the resulting citations difficult to read. Also please don't add unnecessary spaces into these templates. It messes up every page to which they are attached.
Thank you for your advice.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:32, 6 June 2018 (EDT)
- I'm glad my advice is so valued. I'm going to remove the "page/s" test and make the return the citations to their former, pristine state.
- - Tjoneslo (talk) 08:11, 6 June 2018 (EDT)
Very much noted. No need for further edits.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 00:38, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
Seriously, why are we adding this?
Because it was requested by our customer base. Seriously.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 17:40, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
More parameters
Although the current short list of parameters (citeName, name, page, article, version, edition) is adequate for most citations, particularly given how infrequently inline citations are used, it would be convenient to supply more parameters for citations when they're available.
For example, I'm currently importing some material from the [Traveller] Integrated Timeline, which cites publication, publisher, year, and page. Thus I propose adding "publisher" and "date" parameters, with documentation recommending either the unambiguous YYYY-MM-DD (ISO) format or spelling out months.
Additionally, there are a lot more parameters to citation templates on Wikipedia. Most are so unlikely to be used here that they'd be clutter, but a few are common enough that they'd add value.
- "author" would make sense to give credit to authors.
- "quote" would be useful for sources where it makes sense to quote the original source, but not in the main flow of the wiki article.
- "URL" would be useful for web link sources, with "access-date" as a related parameter.
Since "page" and "author" can be plural, there could be a "pages" parameter (which works the same way as "page", except displaying "pp" instead of "p") and an "authors" parameter (which would be a synonym for "author" that one was assumed to use only for citations with multiple authors).
- ― Steve98052 (talk) 04:03, 11 September 2019 (EDT)