Template talk:Cite paper

Template:Cite paper is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit protected}} to notify an administrator to make the requested edit. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here.

Citing a paper, not a book

This template seems tuned to books, not journal articles. A journal article has a title/author/year, but also a journal title and volume/issue/page# info. If I stuff it all into the title field, then italics and other styling info makes a mess of it. Am I using the wrong template (is "cite paper" something of a misnomer)? DMacks 22:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, misnomer. Template:Cite journal is for articles, paper is for books. Kinda confusing... DMacks 22:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I don't think this is necessarily for books. I interpret it as being for standalone papers (example PDF). Λυδ α cιτγ 23:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's correct. What I don't understand, is that p.#/pp.#-# aren't in the template. :s -Ghent 22:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on guys. {{cite book}} is for books, and {{cite journal}} is for papers published in academic journals. This template is for other kinds of "papers", for example a thesis, or an essay or paper that has been separately published (including papers on arXiv). See WP:CITET for a complete list of citation templates.--Srleffler 00:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since not every thesis is published, can a field be included for the school and department which granted the dissertation? I am not so tricky with css to make the changes myself. Intangible 03:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need "pages" parameter

{{editprotected}} To reinforce Ghent's point above, this template sorely needs a parameter to cite specific pages. (I'd favor the {{cite book}} single "pages" parameter that requires inclusion of the "p." or other text, which is more flexible than the cumbersome "page"/"pages" method.) Citations are supposed to be specific, so that editors can verify that the source actually supports the article text. It is unreasonable to expect people to read an entire paper just to find a quote or check a specific fact. If the citation is general, one can always leave out the pages parameter. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just do it. You could whip-up the new template code under your user space and if there are no objections save it on the template. Conformance with cite book is good. Don't add "p." or "pp." whatever to the template. This should be on the call side for flexibility. See also Template_talk:Cite_web#Pages_parameter. --Ligulem 15:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know what the disposition of this long past request, but i'd like to resurrect the request. referencing a multi-paged document without a specific page or page-range is not really very useful. --emerson7 19:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The documentation needs to be updated. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need to broaden beyond academic papers

I get the impression from the "Citing a paper, not a book" discussion above that we are assuming this template will be used only for school papers by single authors, up to and including theses. However, there are many kinds of papers used as reliable source material in Wikipedia that are neither academic papers nor are published in books or journals. Here's an example, currently used for Bullshit! and possibly other articles talking about the scientific evidence for global warming:

* {{cite paper
  | author = Robert T. Watson et al
  | title = Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers
  | publisher = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
  | date = [[29 September]] [[2001]]
  | url = http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf
  | format = PDF
  | pages = p. 5
  | accessdate = 2006-10-18
 }}

which currently results in:

Robert T. Watson; et al. (29 September 2001). "Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers" (PDF). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: p. 5. Retrieved 2006-10-18. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)

I see at least three problems with using the current {{cite paper}} for this source:

There are no provisions made for multiple authors.
There is no "pages" parameter or equivalent, which prevents the display of a specific location for the source data (see "Need "pages" parameter" above).
The title is both quoted and italicized, which is not following Wikipedia's style guidelines. Short print works (short stories, articles, etc.) are quoted; long ones (books, plays, etc.) are italicized — never both. (I'm not sure where papers fall, but I suspect they are quoted, even when they are long.)

I tried to find a different template that could be used in a pinch, but the closest I found were {{cite journal}} and {{cite conference}}, both of which assume the cited work is contained with a larger work whose title must be included. The only real solution is to make a template for "papers" cover not only academic but also scientific, business, governmental, and other individually published papers.

I'd appreciate it if someone could address these problems, so that specific sources, like the one above, will display properly and fully. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't comment much on what cite paper is supposed to be used for. It was made by Bookofjude. I Haven't seen him much around here anymore (last contrib was on July 27 2006). Why don't you whip-up a proposal for new code of the template? --Ligulem 15:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be better to make more specialized templates to replace this one? {{cite dissertation}}, {{cite report}}, etc? I'm only asking because that is the way OpenURLs are divided up. They have a separate thing for dissertations and then a report is considered a genre of book. — Omegatron 04:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other version

Could a version without the paragraphs be added? Here is what I mean:

{{cite paper | author = | title = | version = | publisher = | date = | url = | format = | accessdate = }}

I do not know how to add it with this type of template without messing things up. I hate it when people put the extended versions of the citation templates in articles because they are so unwieldy (although the other versions are too when they are filled out). Thanks, Kjkolb 05:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I (think I) just added what you wanted, without messing up anything else (I think). DMacks 05:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Place for identifier

Done

Would it be possible to add a field like "id =" in Cite book or Cite Cite journal? While many theses and other papers are not published with ISBN, they may have other standard identifiers, such as an {{OCLC}} number. older ≠ wiser 14:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to get these fields separated, actually. Like {{cite book}} has separate fields for isbn=, oclc=, etc. — Omegatron 03:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"id=" has been added. I don't mind if other identifiers are also added, but id is useful for references that don't fit those situations. I've been using "id=", together with {{NCJ}} to link to abstracts on the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Doing it this way allows us to look at Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:NCJ and see which articles are referencing scholarly criminal justice literature. --Aude (talk) 14:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linking date

While the accessdate is linked, the date isn't. Is there any specific reason for this? Logically, both dates should be linked.Beagel 05:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of italics and commas

For improved consistency with current usage in template:cite news and template:cite web, how about removing italics around title and adding them to version? Also changing the full stops to commas? --HailFire 18:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section, quote, and documentation

Hi, this template should have new fields for specifying the specific section of the paper and the quoted text, like other citation templates. Namely, the fields section, sectionurl, and quote, analogous to the fields chapter, chapterurl and quote of template {{cite book}}. Thanks! —surueña 20:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is, to add the following code between the date and the title:
{{
  #if: {{{section|}}}
  | &#32;{{
    #if: {{{sectionurl|}}}
    | [{{{sectionurl}}} {{{section}}}]
    | {{{section}}}
}}, }}
and the following snippet to the end:
{{ #if: {{{quote|}}} | &nbsp;“{{{quote}}}”
}}
Finally, it is also a good idea to replace the {{/doc}} template with the standarized {{Documentation}}. Thanks again. —surueña 12:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Second this motion. It needs coauthors= and quote= fields like other cite templates. Dhaluza (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at this tomorrow or Friday. Don't want to make a mistake on something widely used on so many pages. So, I will need to try these changes on a "sandbox" page to make sure it all works okay. --Aude (talk) 02:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editprotected request

Not done - please put the tag back up when you are satisfied with the suggested changes. Neil ☎ 12:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this comment. This still needs to be done. Dhaluza (talk) 05:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still looking for the 'quote=' field to be implemented like most similar templates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhaluza (talk • contribs) 16:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added the quote param, the documentation has already been changed. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple authors?

Done Can someone who knows how please take functionality from {{cite book}} and add it here to make this template accept multiple authors? This deficiency was noted above, more than a year ago, but nothing seems to have come of it. Picaroon (t) 23:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would an administrator please make the following change to implement this request: Replace lines 14-15:

      | {{{author}}}
    }}

with:

      | {{{author}}}
    }}{{ 
    #if: {{{coauthors|}}} 
    | ; {{{coauthors}}} 
    }}

or simply replace the entire template with the prototype at User:RossPatterson/Cite paper. RossPatterson (talk) 00:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the adjustment, and the change works. Thanks! Picaroon (t) 00:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple authors still does not work.--Ccson (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It works at Ibn Said. What page is it not working on for you? Picaroon (t) 20:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using it in Millennium Challenge Account, footnote 32, Author=Horace Dawson. I looked at your code in Ibn Said, and the difference is that I'm also using the field "authorlink". When I removed the "authorlink" field from the citation as a test, the coauthors are listed, but I'd like to have the first author wikilinked. appears to be another bug.--Ccson 03:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.34.212.145 (talk) [reply]

{{editprotected}} I made a 1-line mistake in placement of the coauthors handling, with the result that coauthors= only works without authorlink=. Would an admin please change:

      | {{{author}}}
    }}{{ 
    #if: {{{coauthors|}}} 
    | ; {{{coauthors}}} 
    }}
  }}
  }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}

to:

      | {{{author}}}
    }}
  }}{{ 
    #if: {{{coauthors|}}} 
    | ; {{{coauthors}}} 
    }}
  }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}

as illustrated by this change in my prototype copy. RossPatterson (talk) 02:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —Random832 17:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works; however, it will only print the first eight names listed, the remaining coauthors are not printed. I guess there has to be some limit, maybe just add a comment to inform editors of the limitation.--Ccson (talk) 21:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. For example:

{{cite paper |first=Horace |last=Dawson |coauthors=[[Edward Brooke]], [[Henry Ponder]], Vinton R. Anderson, Bobby W. Austin, [[Ron Dellums]], [[Kenton Keith]], Huel D. Perkins, [[Charles Rangel]], [[Cornel West]], Clathan McClain Ross |title=The Centenary Report Of The Alpha Phi Alpha World Policy Council |publisher=Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity |date=July 2006 |format=PDF |url=http://www.alpha-phi-alpha.org/Resources/ImageFile/File/image/WPC06-WEB.pdf |accessdate=2008-01-01}}

has 10 coauthors and correctly produces:

Dawson, Horace (July 2006). "The Centenary Report Of The Alpha Phi Alpha World Policy Council" (PDF). Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity. Retrieved 2008-01-01. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Got an example that you think doesn't work right? RossPatterson (talk) 00:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! This was the verye example. I reviewed the citation and I had a '|' after the eight name which obviously made it seem like the names after were part of another field. thanks.--Ccson (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doc upgrade

Done {{editprotected}} Would an administrator please make the following changes to implement the newer {{Documentation}} template:

Replace

{{#if: {{{title|}}}

with

<includeonly>{{#if: {{{title|}}}

and

<noinclude>
{{hprotected}}
{{/doc}}
</noinclude>

with

</includeonly><noinclude>{{pp-template}}
{{documentation}}</noinclude>

RossPatterson (talk) 01:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

done. Od Mishehu עוד מישהו 07:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add error category

Done {{editprotected}} Would an administrator please make the following change to improve the error message for a missing title and to add articles with missing title parameters to Category:Articles with broken citations. This is consistent with the current behavior of {{cite web}} and {{cite news}}.

Replace:

|Error on call to [[Template:cite paper]]: Parameter '''title''' must be specified

with

|You must specify '''''title = ''''' when using {{[[Template:cite paper|cite paper]]}}. 
 {{#if: {{NAMESPACE}}|| [[Category:Articles with broken citations]]}}

RossPatterson (talk) 01:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done.—Random832 17:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PDF symbol

the symbol for a PDF file is not shown in the citation when the format=PDF is chosen. The symbol is shown for other templates such as cite web and cite journal.--Ccson (talk) 13:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The PDF icon is an automatic effect of the Wikipedia environment, not an effect of the template. Can you point to an example that isn't working as you expect? RossPatterson (talk) 01:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Millennium Challenge Account, footnote 32, author=Dawson, Horace when the url does not show a PDF symbol when using cite paper. See Extraordinary rendition by the United States, footnote 116, when the same url provides the symbol when using cite web.--Ccson (talk) 05:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both of those references show PDF icons right now. RossPatterson (talk) 01:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's my browser because it's as I described above. I see "(PDF)" for both references but only the second one has the familiar Adobe triangle symbol.--Ccson (talk) 05:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I use Opera and the Monobook WP skin, and the Adobe Acrobat icon is clearly present between 'Policy Council' and '" (PDF)'. It works in some browsers and not in others - search WP for "acrobat icon pdf mediawiki" and read the threads if you want to see the history. RossPatterson (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you review the "Multiple authors" section above for a continuing problem where I have listed the test case when the template does not list multiple authors?--Ccson (talk) 05:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done and fixed as noted above. RossPatterson (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

Please could you wikilink "{{{date}}}", so that is formatted correctly by Mediawiki.

Therefore change from

  }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}
    | ({{{date}}}). 
    |.

To

  }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}
    | ([[{{{date}}}]]). 
    |.

Thanks, T. Moitie ^[talk] 18:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually could you change it to:

  }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}
    | ({{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d|{{{date}}}}}|{{{date}}}|[[{{{date}}}]]|{{{date}}}}}). 
    |.

To keep it more in with the other cite templates

Cheers, T. Moitie ^[talk] 18:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Majorly (talk) 18:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

language field

this template lacks a language field. the statement below should be all that's required.

}}{{ 
  #if: {{{language|}}} |  ({{{language}}})

--emerson7 16:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where would it go? The code you suggested wouldn't match the formatting of {{cite book}}. I don't disagree with the idea at all, but I think a complete implementation needs to be written first, so people can comment on it. And I think it needs to match the other cite * templates. — Carl (CBM · talk) 12:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry...bad formatting. i've made the necessary corrections. with regard to location, it should follow established conventions, in this case i suppose after the publisher field. --emerson7 16:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cite book uses {{#if: {{{language|}}} | (in {{{language}}})}} before the publisher field. Does some other citation template put the language after the publisher? — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm...there does seem to be some inconsistencies throughout the wiki-templates. the {{cite web}} series places language 'after' publisher, and displays the language without the 'in'. i really don't have a preference, so as stated earlier, it should follow the applicable established conventions. --emerson7 19:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still needs a "pages" parameter

Theses are typically very long documents. A "pages" parameter in this template would be useful. Kariteh (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The documentation needs to be updated. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"pages" parameter needs updating

{{editprotected}} The pages parameter needs to be updated to have a '.' and space after it. The page parameter currently runs on into the publisher parameter. See Template_talk:Cite_paper#Need to broaden beyond academic papers section for an example of this. The example currently shows "p. 5Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change." Note that the '5' is part of "Intergovernmental". This could be done by adding a period and space (. (. ampersand pound 32 ;)) at the end of the pages section before the start of the publisher section. --Littleman_TAMU ^(talk) 18:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done the problem was actually that the |publisher= parameter had its full stop and space after it, while all the other parameters had the punctuation before. Happy‑melon 18:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieval dates for online versions of old printed sources, again

Please contribute to this discussion at Citing sources: Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#Retrieval dates for online versions of old printed sources, again --EnOreg (talk) 16:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus: We have a consensus that access dates for online copies of offline sources, while helpful as a comment in the source, should be hidden from the reader. Could somebody who is competent to adapt the citation templates please do so? The idea is to keep the access date as a template parameter but remove the code that displays it. Thanks, --EnOreg (talk) 09:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC) {{editprotected}} All it takes is to comment out these two lines:[reply]

  }}{{#if: {{{accessdate|}}}
    | Retrieved on [[{{{accessdate}}}]].

--EnOreg (talk) 11:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better if it were just hidden from display with css. Readers should still be able to access it. — Omegatron (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; I've wrapped the "retrieved on..." in a CSS class (reference-accessdate), so it can be hidden either in personal or sitewide css. I will do the same for the other templates with this editprotected request. Happy‑melon 17:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The format date tag in the example doesn't match the description of what's required

In the examples on the main page for cite paper, the help says the date field should be an unlinked ISO 8601 date (I've checked and this works correctly), yet the examples of the template use 'date=1968' etc. Clearly, this is misleading. Could the examples be updated to use a correctly-formatted date? Thanks Rjwilmsi 23:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bug in citation from Johannes Mathesius

Johannes Mathesius#References contains this usage of the template:

{{cite paper|author=[[Preserved Smith]]|title=Luther's Table Talk: a critical study|version=PhD thesis|publisher=Columbia University|date=1907}}

which formats to the following:

Preserved Smith (1907). "Luther's Table Talk: a critical study". PhD thesis. Columbia University. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

Note the two periods after "PhD thesis", so it looks like this: "PhD thesis. ." Also, no period after "Columbia University". Can this be fixed? Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 02:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

Done Cheers, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The publisher= and id= parameters are mis-processed. Everything else in the template ends an item with a closing period (if any), but these two begin with closing periods for the previous items without noting if they were specfied or not. Your citation gets its two periods by not having a pages= parameter, which is displayed just before publisher=. The code:

  }}{{#if: {{{publisher|}}}
    |.&#32;{{{publisher}}}
  }}{{#if:{{{id|}}}
    |.&#32;{{{id}}}

needs to be changed to:

  .}}{{#if: {{{publisher|}}}
    |&#32;{{{publisher}}}.
  }}{{#if:{{{id|}}}
    |&#32;{{{id}}}

In addition, although it doesn't cause this problem, there's a mistake in the version= parameter - it ends with a trailing  , where everything else starts with a leading one. The code:

  }}. {{#if: {{{version|}}}
    |{{{version}}}.&#32;

should be:

  }}. {{#if: {{{version|}}}
    |&#32;{{{version}}}.

RossPatterson (talk) 03:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archive support

I don't see it in the docs, does this template support "archiveurl" and "archivedate" to update inactive links? Perhaps I'm totally misinterpreting "archive", but compare to {{Cite news}}. The citation instance I've hacked in an archive link for is at [1]. Thanks! Franamax (talk) 01:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cite template standardisation

Cite web option for editor-set date styles

See Template talk:Cite web#Working version and final discussion re proposed new parameter of datestyle. As a default it leaves date/accessdate/archive date as wikified dates as is the current case. However if specified it would show unlinked but formated dates as "=dmy" 23 October 2007 as "=mdy" October 23, 2007 or as "=ymd" 2007 October 23. Given ideally cite templates should be consistant, should such a proposal be implemented here too ? Please discuss at the above link. David Ruben ^Talk 19:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add in doi parameter

I think it would be more intuitive to add in an actual doi=parameter like {{cite journal}} instead of being forced to use id={{doi:10.xxxx}}|. The code seems to be able to be copied directly from {{cite journal}} placed right after the id section. Without this change the User:DOI bot will have to be fixed as it replaced the kludgy id format with doi= expecting it to work. See [2] for a "bad" edit.

{{#if:{{{doi|}}} 
  |. [[Digital object identifier|doi]]:{{#if: {{{doi_brokendate|}}} 
     | {{#tag:nowiki|{{{doi}}}}} (inactive [[{{{doi_brokendate|}}}]]) {{#ifeq: {{NAMESPACE}} | {{ns:0}} | [[Category:Pages with DOIs broken since {{#time: Y | {{{doi_brokendate|}}} }}]] }}
     | <span class="neverexpand">[http://dx.doi.org/{{urlencode:{{{doi}}}}} {{#tag:nowiki|{{{doi}}}}}]</span>
    }}
}}

-- KelleyCook (talk) 16:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, you should be able to run DOI bot again. Cheers. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 17:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Worked like a charm, thanks for the quick response. -- KelleyCook (talk) 17:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add

Can you add ca:Plantilla:Cite paper?--KRLS (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dot before title when no author is specified

If I use this template without specifying an author, there is an extra dot at the begining (presumably after the empty author field). Can someone correct this? Svick (talk) 22:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd formatting

In Marc lachance, I tried using this template to cite a doctoral dissertation.

{{cite paper | last=Davidson | first=Michael McKenney | title=An Annotated Database of 102 Selected Published Works for Trombone Requiring Multiphonics | version=D.M.A. dissertation | pages=8 | publisher=University of Cincinnati | date=August 2005 | url=http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/send-pdf.cgi?ucin1123258603 | format=PDF | accessdate=2008-11-04}} displayed as:

Davidson, Michael McKenney (August 2005). "An Annotated Database of 102 Selected Published Works for Trombone Requiring Multiphonics" (PDF). D.M.A. dissertation. 8 University of Cincinnati. Retrieved on November 4, 2008.

This looks unusual particularly in the formatting of the page and institution as "8 University of Cincinnati". Does anyone have suggestions as to how this could be reformatted? Furthermore, is this template really intended for citation of academic theses and dissertations in the first place? If so, the documentation should reflect that better. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:15, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're supposed to use something like |pages=pp. 8. See #Still needs a "pages" parameter above and Template:Cite paper/doc. RossPatterson (talk) 00:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlinking dates

{{editprotected}} Will someone be unlinking accessdate on this cite paper template, like the other cite templates? See Template_talk:Cite_web#Please_delink_accessdate. ++ MortimerCat (talk) 20:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also support this change. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add [[Zh:Template:Cite paper]]

{{Editprotected}} --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 07:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, non-admin, added it to Template:Cite paper/doc subpage. --fryed-peach (talk) 14:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Template:Cite journal

The parameters and output of this template should be the same as that of cite journal. Are there any reasons to oppose merging the two? Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 18:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What if there is no journal, and it's a technical report? --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 16:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 'journal' parameter could be left blank. How would such a paper be cited with the current template? Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 19:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cite journal can handle papers without journal parameters. It already has all the parameters of Cite Paper, and more. To produce a consistent output, please replace the source of this template with

#REDIRECT [[Template:Citation]]

. This will have the effect of merging the two templates. No adverse affects are anticipated. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 23:14, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cite paper template has version parameter that is absent from Cite journal. Ruslik (talk) 10:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disabling the edit request, as this would indeed remove a parameter, and I do not see evidence of consensus to remove the parameter. Pagra shtak 20:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Citation/sandbox now supports a 'version' parameter. A redirect to this page will ensure consistency with other cite templates, and enable other parameters (such as the ones requested below). It will also allow citations to be maintained by User:Citation bot. I intend to request the edit when Template:Citation is updated, so thought I'd elicit response now. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 14:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC) {{editprotected}}[reply]

Once the edit request at Template_talk:Citation#Parameter_support is seen to, a redirect to Template:Citation will allow the version parameter to be retained. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 02:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However citation template does not support doi_brokendate parameter. What is the reason for this? Ruslik (talk) 10:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 13:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why this was done. {{Citation}} uses one format, and the Cite xxx templates use another. Now Cite paper will be inconsistent with {{Cite web}}, {{Cite news}}, etc. Pagra shtak 15:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They all are based on citation/core, so the format should be the same. Ruslik (talk) 16:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The formats are not the same. Observe the difference in commas/periods in these two calls with identical parameters:

Smith (2009-02-09). "My paper". First version. Printing Co: 30–32. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) [Cite paper]
Smith (2009-02-09). "My paper". First version. Printing Co: 30–32. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) [Cite journal]

Pagra shtak 20:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should admit you are right (I undid the change). This template should probably be redirected to cite journal when it supports necessary parameters. Ruslik (talk) 07:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cite journal will accept the missing parameter when this change is implemented by an admin; it will then be possible to redirect to Cite Journal. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 15:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This habit of playing with the code and ignoring the documentation is crap! First off, what does the version parameter mean? It is not properly documented. Perpetuating a parameter without knowing what it means is wrong. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is documented as I can judge. Ruslik (talk) 19:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We're now ready to merge with Template:Cite journal. The template code can now be replaced with a redirect to Cite Journal, which uses consistent punctuation with the existing code and supports all applicable parameters. Thanks, Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 21:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, we're not. The Cite journal template has been coded to treat the series and version parameter as synonyms; they are not. See Template talk:Cite journal for details. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

There will be no loss of functionality if this template is replaced with a redirect to Template:Cite journal; in fact, COinS functionality will be gained. Please replace. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 02:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

year/month vs. date

For annual or monthly reports, please can someone create "year" and "month" fields as an alternative to the "date" field? --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 16:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote marks plus italics

This issue has been raised a few times before but I couldn't see an answer anywhere (apologies if I missed something). Per a question raised at a FAC page, this template assigns both italics and quotes to the titles automatically. As with songs and album names, or short stories and novels, normally you'd either use quote marks (for short works) or italics (for longer ones) but not both. What was the rationale for applying both here? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to an answer to this question (which I raised at the above-mentioned FAC). Per WP:MOSTITLE, titles of papers should generally be displayed in quote marks only; italics might be proper for the title of the occasional very long paper, but I see no case for using both. Maralia (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will be fixed when the edit proposed 2 sections up is put into place. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 02:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]