Help talk:CS1 errors
Archives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
Contents
Unknown parameter ignored[edit]
Seeing "Unknown parameter |1= ignored (help)" in the Template:Royal Collection at Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom#References for no apparent reason. Here is an example: "St Edward's Crown". Royal Collection Trust. Inventory no. 31700.. Firebrace (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Caused by a stray pipe in {{Royal Collection}}, I fixed it, but those errors shouldn't be visible in the first place when
{{{1}}}is empty. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Deprecated in[edit]
I have no idea what to do to clean these uses: Faraway, So Close!, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, The Devil's Advocate (1997 film), and City of Angels (film). Thoughts requested. --Izno (talk) 16:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Clicking the "help" link usually takes you to useful instructions. It is possible that the instructions were updated after you started seeing the errors; they currently explain that– Jonesey95 (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)|in=should be replaced with|language=.
Issues with valid date format[edit]
While the documentation states the date format " accessdate= October 2015 " is valid, it is producing the following error message: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help). For example, see John Wesley Hardin#cite_ref-WDE1_43-0 . — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 18:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Where is it stated that
the documentation states the date format " accessdate= October 2015 " is valid
?|access-date=October 2015gives the error that you see because the date does not include a day so is not a 'full date' as is stated in the template documentation. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Display loop[edit]
@Trappist the monk: Please what display was broke in the category?. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- At this writing, nothing is broken. The category shows only the text that it extracted from Help:CS1 errors#|access-date= requires |url=. It is unclear to me what your 'fix' was intended to do but it included the entirety of Help:CS1 errors from §|access-date= requires |url= to the end.
- So now, your turn. What do you mean by
prevent loop display in the cat
? - —Trappist the monk (talk) 10:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- If it was unclear to you what you should do was ask. The text Pages with this error are automatically placed in Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL.[a]" should appear in the Help:CS1 errors page where it was written but not in the category page. That's loop display, unintentional reference to current page caused by transclusion and that's why tags exist to exclude unnedeed text either in the destination page or in the page hosting the text. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:37, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- What you meant was unclear; what resulted was not unclear so the action I took was correct. I wrote most of this page and I wrote the
{{#ifeq: {{FULLPAGENAME}} | Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL | Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL | [[:Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL]]}}parser function at the bottom of Help:CS1 errors#|access-date= requires |url= (and every other error message section in this page). It is notunintentional reference to current page caused by transclusion
. I intended to include that text in the category page. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 11:03, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- I actually mostly agree that this text shouldn't display on the category page as it doesn't add a whole lot of value from what I can see. I tweaked the implementation. (I am not at all attached to the change.) --Izno (talk) 14:43, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think this change should be reverted so that the page works the same as the other 44 CS1 error category pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)You wrote (some part of) it, but you don't own it; that's first. When I said "unintentional reference" I am referring to the standard way of transclusion and extending or not extending portion of text to the destination page, I am not referring to you, for it's ridiculous to do so. I am referring to the text in whole. And now, as you can see, the earlier no sense display loop was no longer there and that's all I wanted to do from the beginning. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:06, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- I presume that you are talking to me. Please do not put words into my mouth that I have not spoken; I have made no claim to ownership. It is true that I wrote most of the help text; it is true that I created the parser function found there. Neither of those assertions are claims to ownership. I wrote what I wrote because you claim that the reference-to-the-category-page-on-the-category-page is 'unintended'; you are mistaken, it is not unintended. If it can be done better then by all-mean propose a better way that retains or improves upon the current functionality.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- Because you are not attached to your change, I'm going to revert. Each of the error message sections in Help:CS1 errors has that parser function code; it is the same for each section intentionally so that all of the sections and all of the associated categories have the same look and feel. This common mechanism also makes the creation of new sections a bit easier. I am also reverting, at least partially, your changes at Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL because all of the categories should be the same and because I think that cs1|2 error categories should retain the footnote detailing the excluded namespaces. If it is important that 'Pages with this error ...' text be removed from the cs1|2 error categories then we should discuss what, if anything, should replace that text and how that should be implemented across all of the categories. We should not piece-meal tweak one or another according to our individual likes and dislikes.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- Reverts done. Let us now discuss.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- Consistency among similar pages is a reader-friendly practice, and it is a good argument for reversion of a change to just one of those pages. I am happy to hear recommendations for changes to some or all of the pages that would keep all of the CS1 error category pages consistent with one another. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- The improvement I meant was clear, and now even more so since at least one person now understand it. It remains ether to keep no sense back referencing to current page because of "consistency"/you don't like it or to update the other categories so that they longer refer back to themselves. That's the entire essence of tags and parser functions that provide the functionality. –Ammarpad (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- Consistency among similar pages is a reader-friendly practice, and it is a good argument for reversion of a change to just one of those pages. I am happy to hear recommendations for changes to some or all of the pages that would keep all of the CS1 error category pages consistent with one another. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- I actually mostly agree that this text shouldn't display on the category page as it doesn't add a whole lot of value from what I can see. I tweaked the implementation. (I am not at all attached to the change.) --Izno (talk) 14:43, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- What you meant was unclear; what resulted was not unclear so the action I took was correct. I wrote most of this page and I wrote the
- If it was unclear to you what you should do was ask. The text Pages with this error are automatically placed in Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL.[a]" should appear in the Help:CS1 errors page where it was written but not in the category page. That's loop display, unintentional reference to current page caused by transclusion and that's why tags exist to exclude unnedeed text either in the destination page or in the page hosting the text. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:37, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
What should I do about multiple ISBNs?[edit]
I'm quoting a book that has two 13-digit ISBNs listed inside the cover (and two 10-digit ones, but that's besides the point). I tried putting both of them in with a semicolon (;) to separate them, but of course it thinks there is an error. How can I list both, or if that's "against the rules" according to Wikipedia, which one should I pick? Hannahshipman (talk) 05:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Put one or both of them outside the citation template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Are the two disambiguated in some way? Hardcover? Softcover? ... When there is disambiguation, choose the one that best matches the source that you consulted. When there is no disambiguation, choose one to put one inside the cs1|2 template so that that number is included in the citation's metadata; put the other outside.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 09:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
"Missing or empty |url=" with ASINs[edit]
Hello, I'm writing to this talk page specifically to address one concern: {{Cite web}} templates with an assigned asin= parameter but no url= value. It is to my understanding that web citations with a valid asin= value automatically generate the desired Amazon.com link in the citation. Therefore, a {{Cite web}} reference to an Amazon.com page with a correspoding ASIN should only include, at bare minimum, the ASIN, and the URl parameter should be excluded to avoid redundancy. However, this is not the case in practice. An article I have devoted years on, Dexter's Laboratory, has citation errors for reflinks that include an ASIN without a URL parameter. What should I do in this situation? Do I add redundant Amazon.com links in the url= parameter? Or, do I ignore the citation errors? Or something else? Paper Luigi T • C 12:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- Since this edit on 20 March 2013,
{{cite web}}has required|url=to have a valid assigned value so that it can link the value in|title=. It is not the purpose of the named identifiers to do that linking (|pmc=is the singular annoying exception). The error message that you see reflects that requirement. Yes,|asin=does create an external link to Amazon (most named identifiers create external links to related hosts) but that does not remove the requirement for|url=to have an assigned value. - The minimal correct solution is to add a value to
|url=. If you wish to retain the asin id and avoid redundant links consider using this form:{{cite web |url=//www.amazon.com/dp/B0009IWFDS |title=Cartoon Network Halloween 2 - Grossest Halloween Ever (2005) |website=Amazon.com |id=ASIN: B0009IWFDS}}- "Cartoon Network Halloween 2 - Grossest Halloween Ever (2005)". Amazon.com. ASIN: B0009IWFDS.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- Or a more reasonable
{{cite |title=Cartoon Network Halloween 2 - Grossest Halloween Ever (2005) |website=Amazon.com |asin=B0009IWFDS |mode=cs1}}- to give
- "Cartoon Network Halloween 2 - Grossest Halloween Ever (2005)". Amazon.com. ASIN B0009IWFDS.
- Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- Or a more reasonable