Talk:Diploglottis australis

CS1 citation
I came to this page by way of because of this citation:



The citation contains the deprecated parameter Dec. It also has 31 May 2002. In this case month and date are not in agreement. Checking the page linked in the citation for the correct date, I find neither a May 2002 date nor a December date. There is, however, a 1991 date so that is the date I used.

In CS1, titles can be problematic as this citation demonstrates. CS1 provides information from citations to users of automated tools in the form of COinS metadata. The use of Wiki markup, templates, and HTML entities for the purposes of rendering a visually attractive citation corrupts this metadata. For example, the title metadata for:
 * Diploglottis cunninghamii – New South Wales Flora Online

should be:
 * (mostly readable)

but instead is:
 * (not so readable)

I removed the wiki markup and so that the citation produced clean metadata. Further, I removed " – New South Wales Flora Online" from title because this string of text appears on every page of Flora Online and is not actually part of the page's title. That information, if it is necessary is probably best made part of PlantNET – New South Wales Flora Online.

I removed 2.0 because that information does not appear on the referenced page.

Editor Macropneuma and provided a url that purports to be dated 31 May 2002. I don't dispute that. However, that date is not available through the url provided in the citation. Perhaps it is best to delete date and use accessdate – much better than linking to the database dump.

CS1 is a fairly complex bit of code. But, it isn't yet clever enough to strip parameter values of all of the stuff that editors might want to add. Please remove the nonessential markup so that users of the metadata aren't put to the extra work of removing it.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Dec was an old and simple copy and paste accidental mistake which correctly did need deleting. Nothing else needed deleting. Over the years I have discussed these systems with the NSW government relevant Herbarium staff and myself professionally used them for many years in other government jobs. References: 1, 2, 3 —the actual data source file, including the page update dates. Of course the last ref no. 3, this page’s, in fact all the pages’, master source file is never linked to, that’s a ridiculous, argumentative, straw man argument. See: 1, 2, 3 and so on and on, of my extensive knowledge and experience of this NSW PlantNet citation topic. Please stop. --Macropneuma 01:28, 12 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Why such hostility? I have not written anything that attacks you nor in anyway dismisses you as inexperienced.


 * To say that [n]othing else needed deleting is not true as I have explained. CS1 is a tool that works well for a lot of Wikipedia's citation needs.  It is not a tool that works well for all of Wikipedia's citation needs.  If CS1 doesn't render a citation in a form that you need, perhaps it is best that you don't use CS1 and instead, craft citations to PlantNET as is described at How to Reference PlantNET.


 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 10:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The hostility and arrogance—needless deletions ignoring small crucial details for genuinely interested readers (and editors), etc.—has been all yours. Goodbye. --Macropneuma 10:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)