Template talk:Cite Oregon Geographic Names

Edition with ordinal suffix?

 * this and  or  or  or  should give: McArthur, Lewis A.; McArthur, Lewis L. (1992) [First published 1928]. Oregon Geographic Names ( ed.). Portland, Oregon: Oregon Historical Society Press. p. 106. ISBN 9780875952369. OCLC 25874046. The functionality of template:ordinal should be implemented here within this template. --Diwas (talk) 09:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how to implement Template:Ordinal into this template, because if someone were to input "3nd" or something similar as the edition number, the ordinal template would spit out "3ndth". It doesn't recognize non-numerical values. Do you have any ideas?  Little  Mountain  5   14:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not a programmer. I'm not sure if authors would see that 3ndth and would correct it or not. On the other hand if someone were to input "7th edition" now it spit out "7th edition ed." I guess, it would be too complex for such a formatting template to improve it to recognize ordinal suffixes, typed in by author. If it is sure that authors do not other inputs than a number or a number with a suffix, maybe you will find a way to implement to cut all characters on the right side of the number, befor adding the correct ordinal suffix. A benefit of this would be that all the uses that are now in articles will continue to work correct. — Another idea would be, to let be unchanged templates like this and ask a bot to check article texts for templates that contains incorrect ordinal suffixes. In texts, bots can't find incorrect ordinal suffixes, because there are other combination of numbers with the character pairs ‘st’ ‘nd’ ‘rd’ ‘th’ like measurement units and codes. But in templates as this, it is clear. But if an author write 2st and have the 1st edition, the bot unfortunetly would write “2nd ed.”, and authors often don't find out what the bot is doing. — But there are thousends of incorrect suffixes per year in other textes, but only several per year with “ed.” and maybe only one per year with this template. Seeing this, maybe it would be an inefficiency work to upgrade this template, if it is not as easy as I thought. Best regards --Diwas (talk) 11:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)