Template talk:Wikisource1911Enc citation

Usage

This template is used by editors to cite material in Wikisource. The editor may not be using material from Britannica verbatim, but merely as a reference. This template is also used by editors to link to material in Wikisource without incorporating its contents in any form in the article proper. In both of these cases, the use of {{1911}} is inappropriate since it adds categories indicating that material has been used verbatim when it hasn't.

I have used this template in the past as a substitute for {{1911}} because at that point it could link to Wikisource information and 1911 couldn't. Perhaps I should have retained the {{1911}} notice as well, but with the text readily at hand I figured 1911 was superfluous and an editor could readily assess things if curious. Linking to the actual source text seemed much more important; but the categorizing of course was then frustrated. So certainly someone could question the wisdom of those edits. I don't, but out of respect for other editors, in retrospect, leaving {{1911}} might have been more appropriate.

I don't think {{1911}} can be generalized so this template can be simply redirected to it. This template could be rewritten to incorporate {{1911}}, but to accommodate past usage of this template {{1911}} would need to be generalized to allow the categories flagging verbatim text not to be used, and this template would need a flag to indicate a verbatim category should be used so that its default behavior in the absence of the flag will match the current behavior which is not to use the categories. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 17:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This template now redirects to {{Cite EB1911}} a name closer to {{cite encyclopedia}}. -- PBS (talk) 10:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]