Category talk:Citation templates

Logic templates on WP:AUM
See the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:Avoid_using_meta-templates. – Adrian | Talk 15:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Footnote templates
What is so special about Note, Ref, Note label and Ref label that they cannot be added? —Phil | Talk 12:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * They've been deprecated by the cite.php system, which is what you are using when you type %lt;ref> to denote references. Trust me; cite.php is much better.  --EngineerScotty 21:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

cite blog
copied from User talk:Ligulem :
 * Hey, I noticed you're doing some work on citation templates, particularly cite news. Has anyone thought about a possible cite blog?  It would need, as parameters, the date, a permalink URL, the name of the blog, the title of the post, and the name of the poster.  What do you think?  -- Cyde Weys  02:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem. If you want me to create such a template, I can do it for you. Could you give some detailed examples for the wiki-source that the template should produce? --Ligulem 07:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Tech report template
I would like to have a citation template for technical reports, similar to the @TechReport citation type in bibtex:
 * Require fields: author, title, institution, year
 * Optional fields: type, number, address, month (or date), (note?)

I couldn't find something like this among the current templates. --KYN 21:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What is a tech report? Where would that be used? Could you provide some examples, I mean template call → wiki code examples? (Example for an example: → The book.) --Ligulem 21:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Example:

should produce something like

A. U. Thor (2006). How I solved the problem, Technical Report UoS-TechRep-2006-1234, Department of Problem Solutions, University of Somewhere, Box 123, 456 Somewhere

The important thing is that a techincal report is published by an organisation like a university, research institute, or company, that it has a number generated by that organisation, and that you may need the physical address to that organisation to order a copy of the report. --KYN 22:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, just realized that the idea of a technical report is somewhat restricted, this is the notation used in LaTex's bibtex citation system. Maybe "report" instead of "techreport" is better? --KYN 22:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Just pointing out here for those who arrive at this page through search: there's Template:Cite techreport. Shreevatsa (talk) 00:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Regular magazines (not journals?)
Is there a template which is designed for regular magazines (Time, Newsweek, etc.)? I have tried using cite journal but the results often come out looking ... strange. In particular, the journal template only has fields for year and month, where a newsmagazine may have several issues coming out in a single month. -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You can always use the date field in the cite journal template rather than month and year. That way you can put in the whole date. The example from the talk page is:
 * which produces:
 * Is that different from what you were looking for?  You can also try cite news.  Neil916 15:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm, okay. That might solve the problems I was having.  I was having trouble reading the syntax on Template talk:cite journal and didn't realize that "date" could be used instead of "month" and "year".  I'll try this. -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Is that different from what you were looking for?  You can also try cite news.  Neil916 15:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm, okay. That might solve the problems I was having.  I was having trouble reading the syntax on Template talk:cite journal and didn't realize that "date" could be used instead of "month" and "year".  I'll try this. -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Letters?
What do we use to cite letters that are part of a special collections department of a university, etc.? -plange 02:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Cite album-notes
Sometimes album notes are great references, so I have created a template for those. Feel free to modify.--Cerejota 02:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Federal Register
Is there a template for citing the Federal Register? Several other templates exist for citing laws, US laws in particular, but I didn't see one for this. --EngineerScotty 21:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Patents?
Looking for a structure for citing patents.... Vonfraginoff 16:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Speeches
I think a speech citation template would be really useful SirGrant 01:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Cite archives
What would be best to cite archives of historical facts published by a government, such as past leaders of the opposition in Canada? So far I've been using Cite web like this: But I'm not sure if that it the best way. --Arctic Gnome 19:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Citing maps
Could someone (who knows what they are doing) create a template for citing maps. This would be useful, especially when some maps contain some quite relavant information on their reverse side, particularly hiking maps. I am thinking the citation should shouw something similiar to what is listed here. Anyone up to the challenge? Nomadtales 03:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Microformat for citations
Please be aware of the proposal for a microformat for marking citations in (X)HTML. See also WikiProject Microformats. Andy Mabbett 14:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

New tool template:Adt

 * See Template:Adt&mdash;when subst'd, the typing aid provides the "accessdate=ISO date" for citing url's correctly. // Fra nkB 17:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Historical markers as sources
I've photographed quite a few historical markers in my area, and uploaded the shots to Commons. Can these photos be cited as sources, and is there a citation template that would be appropriate? An example is Image:Granville, Indiana Marker.png, a photo I'd like to be able to explicitly reference as a source in the article for Granville. Any thoughts/suggestions would be great, thanks! Huwmanbeing &#9728;  &#9733;  23:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Subcategorizing footnote templates
I would like to place all the templates that generate non-Cite.php footnotes into one category, to help organize this category. Any objections? CharlesGillingham (talk) 02:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

This would include ref*, note*, cref, etc. CharlesGillingham (talk) 02:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

CharlesGillingham (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Going ahead with this. CharlesGillingham (talk) 05:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Never got around to it. Man, it's quiet in here. CharlesGillingham (talk) 07:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Cite report (x-ref to comments)
In regard to Template:Cite report, input on that template's talk page (x-ref'd here for central access): --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 00:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * suggested new feature ~ archive date / archive url
 * suggested additional appropriate use ~ corporate financial documents

Deprecated templates
I'd like to deprecate and remove from this category the following templates: Comments? CharlesGillingham (talk) 23:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Web-cite
 * unicite
 * global cite a
 * global cite b


 * Later, I would like deprecate and replace harvrefcol and scnote, but these are still used in several articles. CharlesGillingham (talk) 01:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Organization
Propose to create categories and classify templates:

---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 13:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Category:Citation Style 1 templates for templates
 * Category:Citation Style 1 specific-source templates
 * Category:Citation Style 1 templates using non-standard parameters
 * Category:Citation Style Vancouver templates for templates
 * Category:Footnote templates for templates
 * Category:Footnote3 templates for Footnote3 templates
 * Category:Harv templates Harvard style citation templates


 * Support. But you're going to have a few oddballs left over, aren't you? CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * There always will be. Once it gets sorted, then we can see where they might fit. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 00:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


 * What's your plan with the specific-source templates? Are you going to split them all up by citation style?


 * Also, I don't think specific source templates are really "attribution templates", although I noticed a lot of specific source templates seem have accidentally fallen into this category. (A specific source template is something like Searle 1980:
 * and an "attribution template" is something like 1771 Britannica,
 * or, at least, that's how I understand it; they have different purposes.) So maybe "Specific source templates" should be moved back up to the top level, and then someday, somebody has to dig out all those specific source templates. (I've moved hundreds of them over the years.) CharlesGillingham (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * or, at least, that's how I understand it; they have different purposes.) So maybe "Specific source templates" should be moved back up to the top level, and then someday, somebody has to dig out all those specific source templates. (I've moved hundreds of them over the years.) CharlesGillingham (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * or, at least, that's how I understand it; they have different purposes.) So maybe "Specific source templates" should be moved back up to the top level, and then someday, somebody has to dig out all those specific source templates. (I've moved hundreds of them over the years.) CharlesGillingham (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think I have been changing specific source and attribution. We should create an attribution meta-template: some of these are all over the map.
 * Not really splitting, just adding another category. I figured it would be handy to know what templates are CS1 compliant, and which aren't.
 * ABS name uses cite web, so it is a CS1 specific-source
 * Cite AClon uses cite book, but prepends some stuff so it goes in the non-standard cat. I suspect most of those could be updated later.


 * Any clue why Category:Specific-source templates was removed from Category:Citation templates? ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 21:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No clue. CharlesGillingham (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved it back. CharlesGillingham (talk) 22:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)