Template talk:ISSN

Too specific

Present version is too specific. It doesn't work well for use in references, particularly when one reference has two ISSNs. Mud_volcano#References I think the original article actually needs to use an Infobox which includes ISSN as a component. (SEWilco 21:22, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC))

A page similar to Special:Booksources (as for ISBN) would be preferable, but in general, it seems to work fairly well. -- User:Docu

See Bugzilla:10867 and Bugzilla:3663. — Omegatron 01:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Wishful thinking about ISSN

I am not at all happy with ISSNs in general, starting with the problem that the managing company doesn't release the list of ISSNs for public download/parse/review. But I'm also none too happy with being shunted off to a German library for my ISSN work - especially since many of the articles have Wikipedia articles, homesites with useful info, or both. In my dreams, it would be possible to define an {{ISSNdef}} template for the journal's article, and have the {{ISSN}} template link to the journal when available, or a "bridge page" when not - similar to how the {{ISBN}} template works. Does anyone know if this magic is even possible? --Alvestrand 11:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I posted ISSN support wanted to wikitech-l. --LA2 20:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

why template for ISSN but not needed for ISBN

I am sorry for spamming but found no better place to ask. There is some tweak implemented in Wikipedia that allows automatic linking of an ISBN but for ISSN it does not happen and, therefore, one has to use this template. Consider this example:

• <nowiki>Isaac Babel, ''1920 Diary'', Yale, 2002, ISBN 0300093136</nowiki>

produces the following output:

• Isaac Babel, 1920 Diary, Yale, 2002, ISBN 0300093136

Please note that no template, like {{ISBN|0300093136}} is used to produce the link above near ISBN.

At the same time, to have an ISSN linked, one needs to add a template. Why is that so? --Irpen 18:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's a good question. I was sort of wondering the same thing, but I had no idea that ISBN is magic like that. I was thinking that ISBN might be a magic word, but it's not listed there. But look here. I think this is our answer. Wasn't immediately obvious. I think ISBN needs to be wikilinked to this page on some the cite help pages. --KeithB 05:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Unhelpful results for some titles

Using this template for ISSN codes which are valid, but not known to WorldCat (example: ISSN 1477-6111, as used on West Midland Bird Club) results in the user being taken to a page on their site with an unhelpful

The page you tried was not found. You may have used an outdated link or may have typed the address (URL) incorrectly.

message (yet retuning a "200" http header, not "404"). I've written to WorldCat, using their feedback form, pointing this out, and asking them to substitute something like

We don't know that ISSN. Try searching for it on Google.

as well as letting them know that Wikipedia is linking to them in this way; but if anyone has contacts there with whom they can raise the issue, please do. Or is there a more suitable alternative target? Andy Mabbett 19:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's kind of dead. I changed the query string to another website. -- User:Docu

Suggested category

More specific than (or rather, along with) Category:External link templates, Category:Arts and culture-related templates might be considered- though it's true not every magazine falls under this category, not every book does either, yet OCLC is in a subcat of this, so... dunno... (yes, I'm an admin and the protection isn't a barrier to my doing this myself, but common sense- what little I possess of it - suggests I not make this change unilaterally.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

WorldCat URL format change

{{editprotected}} I noticed that this template creates links to WorldCat using http://worldcat.org/... rather than http://www.worldcat.org/... Given that http://worldcat.org/... redirects to the http://www.worldcat.org/... version and is now the recomended format: [1], could this template please be changed to point to the www.worldcat.org version in the first place? :) -Paul1337 (talk) 00:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Cancel that editprotected request; I hadn't realised that this template used the ISSN search link template so the change only needs to be made there. -Paul1337 (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Tweak for print

{{editprotected}} Simply replace the current template with this. It'll help clean up PDFs and Books.

<!--
-->{{hide in print<!--
 -->|[[International Standard Serial Number|ISSN]]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/issn/{{{1}}} {{{1}}}]<!--
-->}}<!--
-->{{only in print<!--
 -->|ISSN&nbsp;{{{1}}}<!--
->>}}<!--
--><noinclude>
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 21:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

This should probably be done for {{ISSN search link}} instead and a slew of other identifiers such as doi, PMID, PMC and other identifiers. It should also be for all forms of print probably, and not just for PDF/book print. I suggest discussing this shortly at Village Pump Proposals to make sure the community agrees. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion started at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Tweak of identifier in print. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 22:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Alright, well there seems to be consensus for this, so might as well make that edit now. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Please revert the edit or correct the HTML comment end tag. (Line 7: ->>}}<!--) Preferably the former. – allen四names 01:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully fixed now? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Appear to work now. I don't know if the {{Only in print}} works. Thank you. – allen四names 01:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Something wrong

I believe this edit accidentally removed two brackets and the template is now rendering incorrectly. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 06:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Delink option

Would it be possible to incorporate an option that specifies that "ISSN" be delinked? When you have an article that talks about numerous journals and periodicals one after another, ISSN need only be linked for the first usage of the template - if the editor could then place a parameter into following uses of the template that specified delinking the ISSN component, it would allow these instances to read better.

Much like the "lk" parameter in Template:Convert#Parameters. Fattonyni (talk) 16:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I see no reason to. Compare ISSN 1541-4817 to ISSN 1541-4817 both as rendered and as wiki-text. – Allen4names 00:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

My point is that if one uses the ISSN template so that the number is linked (e.g. 1541-4817 in your example), ISSN is also linked. All fine and well if there is only one usage of the template. But with subsequent usages in an article, the editor ends up with numerous linked ISSNs throughout the article, the number of which could become very large depending on the type of article. This goes against WP policy of only linking the first term. If there was an option to disable the linking of ISSN, the following would be possible in an article:

Journal of Foo Organisation, ISSN 1541-4817

Journal of Bar Organisation, ISSN 0332-4907

Journal of FooBar Organisation, ISSN 0047-231X

So the ISSN is unlinked, but the link to the worldcat category is still provided for better integration. Fattonyni (talk) 15:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Change request

At the moment the link to Worldcat is too specific. For example {{ISSN|0028-0836}} links to http://www.worldcat.org/issn/0028-0836 which is one hit for this ISSN. I would like someone to change it to http://www.worldcat.org/search?fq=x0%3Ajrnl&q=n2%3A0028-0836 which gives more hits. It's all the same journal but at many different libraries in different countries plus eJournals. What do you think? --91.22.200.127 (talk) 20:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)