Template talk:Cite encyclopedia/Archive 1

Usage for Dictionaries
I don't see a related template "citedictionary", so I'll use this one for the citation of dictionaries. If there is one specifically for citing dictionaries or if there is some objection/concern about cross-utilization like this, please report it here. I'll note here also a list of these cross-uses (there will be only a handful). Regards, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 16:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've used it too, for example at Congius. Circeus 18:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There should be a |dictionary= field that is redundant with the |encyclopedia= field. This would make things less confusing when cite dictionary is used in an article. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Unlinked year
I unlinked the year, because according to the Manual of Style, years should not normally be linked. If the user wants a linked year in a specific citation, it can still be specified there, so this should cover both cases.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Why is accessdate wikilinked again? (Change here.) The reason says "consistency", but don't CONTEXT and MOS indicate that it should not be linked? -  chic geek  talk 13:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. MOS:UNLINKYEARS. Please make the date unlinked, someone. Punkmorten (talk) 22:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Request for more fields
This template is missing a few useful fields. The publisher and article author are often important, and sometimes the editors and ISBN as well.--Yannick 06:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. publisher, first and last, coauthors, editor, id respectively. PoptartKing 03:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

How do you use this template?
, edition. Article: 
 * PoptartKing 03:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

?

A few thoughts...

 * 1) You might want to move it to Cite encyclopedia, to fit in with the other templates (Cite paper, Cite book, etc) which all have spaces.
 * 2) You might also want to make  an alternative wording for, likewise  and  for.

Nothing desperate, though. :-) Jude (talk,contribs,email) 10:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That's actually how I originally intended to implement it, but I was worried about breaking pages using the old style. Guess there's nothing wrong with redundancy though. PoptartKing 02:07, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that I understand the code, and I could be wrong about this, but have you thought about stacking the elements? You could maybe simplify:


 * To:


 * Or possibly even:


 * I imagine you could also stack ency/encyclopedia/work much the same way--Possibly ?  Jude (talk,contribs,email) 03:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Authorlink
The authorlink function is doing something strange. You can see the behaviour in the Fidel Castro article (footnote 3). An external link to an author was added, but the template somehow fails to put the right amount of brackets around the name. Resulting in something like this: |Stoner[, K. Lynn]. The problem is that the template garbles up the lastname and the author url. The correct references would be something like this |Stoner K. Lynn Stoner (note that the last name "Stoner" is currently in the URL).

I had a go at fixing this (by pasting the code from the book citation template), but the template syntax is a bit too complicated for me. Could somebody perhaps fix this? mensch • t 12:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The authorlink parameter is intended to link to a wikipedia article rather than an external page. In retrospect maybe that doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering encyclopedia editors aren't particularly notable, but I don't want to break format with the other cite templates. PoptartKing 00:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Although encyclopedia editors may not be notable, the article authors often are. Britannica, in particular, has a history of seeking out the highest authority on a topic and asking them to write the article. I believe the original article on relativity was written by Albert Einstein, and the original article on anarchy was written by Peter Kropotkin.--Yannick 04:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Author name
I've noticed that whenever the name of the author is inserted as "first" and "last", the template produces a space between the last name and the comma. Can anyone fix this? Pecher Talk 20:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Volume and pages
I tried to fix this, but couldn't. Something causes the comma after "Volume" to appear even if "pages" is undefined. Circeus 15:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I did some tweaks. Could check your use case again and post here the exact call that causes bad output, in case it is still bad? --Ligulem 17:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Apparently doesn't work. See footnote #5 at Taxonomy of Banksia. Circeus 18:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Access date
In all other cite templates, accessdate is wikilinked. -- Avi 18:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. I will iterate through all calls now to make sure there are no doubled links. --Ligulem 20:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

editor shows up in wrong place
The editor field shows up in the wrong place. If you omit the editor, the template cites Article X In Encyclopedia Y, but with an editor field it says Article X In Editor Z, which doesn't make much sense.--Yannick 04:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This is proper, because most encyclopedia will have individual articles written by specific authors, and wil then be formatted as "Doe, John, foos of foo In Smith, Henry (ed), Encyclopedia of things". If you omit the normal author, it is the only thing removed, therest of the formatting is kept. If there are no single article authors, then using the chapter parameter of cite book is possibly a better option. Circeus 05:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, I don't see that as proper for an encyclopedia reference. The reason that an author's or editor's name appears before the title of a book is because that's how books are usually sorted. But encyclopedias are sorted by brand name or publisher, never by the editor's name. So I think it should the template should produce "Doe, John, foos of foo In Encyclopedia of things, Ed. Henry Smith" or "Doe, John, foos of foo In Universica's Encyclopedia of things, Ed. Henry Smith". See the following excerpt from the Modern Languages Association Citation Style Guide:--Yannick 23:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Article in a reference book or an entry in an encyclopedia If the article/entry is signed, include the author's name; if unsigned, begin with the title of the entry
 * Guignon, Charles B. "Existentialism." Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Edward Craig. 10 vols. London: Routledge, 1998.

Stray period after article author initials
If one includes author(s) of an article, there is a period after the author name (or list of names) before the year. That may be correct (is it?), but if one uses just an initial for the author's first name, that gives a doubled period, which is clearly not correct. That is:



gives:


 * &#32;""..

DMacks 04:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've also found that somewhat annoying. I'd just like to add that it seems to be inconsistent with the way that Template:Cite book and Template:Cite journal work, which leads to some ugly reference lists when this template is used alongside others. EALacey 21:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Request to make "title/article" field optional
Can somebody make the "title/article" field optional? In at least one major article I'm working on, Muhammad, I've found it much easier to cite the encyclopedia as a whole, without articles, in the "References" section, then in the footnotes I'll specify the encyclopedia name plus the article. I'm putting dummy text in the "title" fields right now in order to avoid needless duplication of cites for the same encyclopedia in the "References" section. If somebody opposes this change, but has a better suggestion about how to do this (see Muhammad), I'm all ears. - Merzbow 23:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I learned template coding and create a copy of this template in my own userpace that makes the article/title fields optional. It's at User:Merzbow/Cite_encyclopedia. Test page that shows usage is here. - Merzbow 22:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I made changes to allow this. One problem was that if there is no article or title parameter set then there would be no text to display for any 'url' given. I set "Link" as default text for this if the parameters are unset. Using the name of the encyclopedia itself might be a better option, but would require some restructuring of the template. In any case, 'Link' should be an improvement over the '' which would have displayed previously. --CBD 12:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! - Merzbow 01:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Can someone add a quote parameter?
It would be nice to have an optional quote parameter like cite book, cite web, cite news, etc., have. Thanks in advance. — Bellhalla 14:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If you want to test it, when implemented, see the Notes section of List of Speakers of the Texas House of Representatives. The two uses of Cite encyclopedia have a non-empty quote parameter in them. — Bellhalla 14:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Figured out what needs to be added and how to request...
 * Editprotected
 * Can the following:


 * be added into this code:

}}
 * so that the lines read like this:

}}
 * in order to allow the optional quote parameter as requested above? I have tested this in User:Bellhalla/cite encyclopedia on User:Bellhalla/Test. — Bellhalla 15:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, lets see if I broke it...



Hmmm ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks like a missing space befor the quote, and the quote needs to be in italics. Now to see if I can fix it. ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 20:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, that looks better. Let me know if I broke it in some unexpected way. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Why is the quote parameter italicized when it is also encased in double quotes? It is not for cite_book or cite_journal. Compare WP:MOS. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 20:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It was just done to bring attention to the diffrence between the citation and the quotation. If the MOS said no-no then I guess it's got to go-go. :) ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 01:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 12:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Linking the encyclopedia field within a reference


yields

which correctly links the encyclopedia field. But if I put the same thing inside a  even   --S.K. 17:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Does it? I thought it wasn't updated yet. Circeus 18:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure looks like it. :-) --S.K. 09:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Language
Why is there no language field? I think it would be useful as not only English-language encyclopedias are citeable. The location field isn't a viable alternative. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 22:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Language icons are used fro that. THe inclusion of language in some templates is accidental. Circeus (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, people are certainly going to continue to wonder about this as long as the numero uno citation template, cite news contains the language parameter. __meco (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Why aren't interwikis shown?
As you can see from Template:Cite book, when an interwiki is added to the template documentation, it must be shown on the template page. There are interwikis on Template:Cite encyclopedia/doc, but they are not shown on Template:Cite encyclopedia. Does anyone know why? --Acepectif (talk) 05:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * They're not shown because they are interwiki links for the doc page, not for the template, and should only show on the doc page. In the Cite book case, the interwiki links are for the template itself, so they are intended to be included when the doc page is.  RossPatterson (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Retrieval dates for online versions of old printed sources, again
Please contribute to this discussion at Citing sources: Wikipedia talk:Citing sources --EnOreg (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

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)

Final period
The period after "publisher" was recently changed to a comma. This results in a final comma, instead of a period if no pages are cited. I think it should be removed, and nested with the page formatting. }}". (I'm basing this on template:cite book.) --Bwpach (talk) 15:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've reverted this edit because in instances where there was no page number, the citation ended with a comma instead of a period, which looked really weird (and also grammatically incorrect). Hopefully there is a better solution for this. Khoikhoi 21:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I hardly can think of many cases where cite encyclopedia is truly a necessary improvement on cite web to cite web-based/published encyclopedias. Circeus (talk) 22:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * True, but cite web doesn't have a perimeter for "edition", does it? Khoikhoi 22:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Since "volume" becomes mostly unnecessary in web encyclopedia, this can be easily inserted in "work" ("Encyclopedia of stuff, Xth edition") where a distinction is necessary. It's unlikely if you are linking to a web page that an edition distinction is even necessary to mention! It all ultimately hinges on whether you believe the article is best served by citing a legitimate web source or by adding in the physical specifics. Most of the time, adding the paper reference is rather superfluous (though mentioning the ISBN is a cromulent option). Circeus (talk) 04:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for additional paramater
Could a parameter equivalent to cite journal's "format" be added? Helpful for encyclopedia's accessed online where a fee/registration is required (such as ODNB, Grove, etc.). Budding Journalist 09:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This'll happen automatically when the edit below is made. Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  18:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Consistency with other Citation templates
editprotected Please replace the page with the sandbox. This will make the format consistent with other citation templates, and ensure that future updates to other citation templates immediately affect this one. The Cite_encyclopedia/testcases, copied from the documentation page, show that all parameters continue to function; the only change is the position of the editor, which is brought in line with {citation} and {cite book}. Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  18:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC) Done--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Simplified version needed for Dutch Wikipedia
This template is too complicated for the Dutch Wikipedia. Could someone help to create a simplified version on nl:Sjabloon:Cite_encyclopedia? Wiki-uk (talk) 04:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have made a start there now, but it's not that easy... Anyone? Wiki-uk (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How exactly do you want it simplifying? Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  15:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The template makes use of a sub-template, which appears to be unwanted, and there is the desire for simple templates for references. In the meantime it has already been marked for speedy deletion by an administrator. Wiki-uk (talk) 16:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The "sub-template" is Citation/core, which is used by a bunch of templates here on to produce related and consistent results.  If that's not what you want, you might consider starting from the last version before this template switched to Citation/core. RossPatterson (talk) 20:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that! I have now created nl:Sjabloon:Citeer encyclopedie. Could you check if I did this correctly? Wiki-uk (talk) 13:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hard to say - my Dutch is really rusty. But you might try grabbing the test cases from Template:Cite encyclopedia/testcases, translating them, and seeing how they compare to our results. RossPatterson (talk) 22:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Request
To allow elimination of the last deprecated  and   parameters, please change the line   to. Debresser (talk) 01:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:39, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Debresser (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Capitalised documentation page
See Template_talk:Cite_web. Debresser (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Some help with multi-series encyclopedia?
I've been trying to add a citation template to the the History of the American Expeditionary Forces Air Service, 1917-1919 which I've decided is more like an encyclopedia than a book and such should probably use the cite encyclopedia template. The source is a history of the American air forces during the first World War, and consisted of several mulitpart series. (Ex. Series E was "Squadron Histories", Volume 7 of that series was "28th, 30th-37th, 41st, and 43d Aero Squadrons".) Now my problem is that the article I'm trying to reference is in Volume 7 of Series E, and I've no idea how to specify that in the template. Maybe ? Is there an official way to do this that I have somehow missed? If it helps, the article I'm trying to reference can be found online here. I have no idea which of the 282 total volumes "Series E, Vol 7" is. Cheers -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû  19:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if help is still needed, but the "series" parameter leaves room for that kind of information, e.g.

or fill in everything in "series" Alternatively, you could make Series E, Vol 7, etc., part of the title, in italics. Hope that helps, Cavila (talk) 17:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this normal?
This: renders as follows: For some reason or another, no author turns up, Cavila (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * In the code of this template I see a line  Why dows it have "author" two times? I don't know if that will solve the problem, but it seems superfluous at least. Debresser (talk) 06:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * What happens if you remove the empty parameters? Like this

Debresser (talk) 06:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Also wrong... Debresser (talk) 06:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah! Actually, once the empty parameters "last=" and "first=" are removed entirely, the template is rendered normally, at least on my screen. Seems easy to solve then, but as it happens, I have created a couple of templates based on this one which (ideally) allow the user to choose between either "last"/"first" or "author". Because of the mere presence of two empty parameters ("last"/"first"), the last option "author" just doesn't work. It's not too late for me to readjust the derivative templates that I've created, but the problem may be worth pointing out anyhow. Cavila (talk) 07:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Excuse me, but might I inquire which templates you are talking about? After all, we are not necessarily in favor of yet another citation template... Debresser (talk) 09:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, they're specific-source templates, with only a limited set of options available to the editor. For instance, can be used for something like this:  Basically, it's the encyclopedia template, with some of the parameters filled in for ease of reference and consistency. Except, of course, that "author" doesn't work here. Cavila (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Concerning the problem with the author parameter: MediaWiki parameters discern between undefined and defined empty parameters, and the default values in template parameters are only applied for undefined parameters. That's why an empty defined last parameter gets preference over a defined author parameter in the above code. I'd rather not complicate this template to use constructs to ignore defined empty parameters. In a wrapper template, you can however always only pass in e.g. the  parameter if it was actually passed into the wrapper and skip it entirely otherwise by using a construct like:   ← doesn't actually work anymore with the "new" MediaWiki parser, needs a different workaround today.  Amalthea  18:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC) Obviously, that makes it much more unreadable.  Amalthea  20:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed that adding constructs will make the template code uglier. What do you say about my two notes above that there is a superfluous 'author' parameter in the code, and that the 'editor' parameter is rendered somehow as the 'publication' parameter? Debresser (talk) 17:55, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, the second "author" parameter was superfluous. It never affected the functionality though. I can't say anything about the way the "editor" is shown if both author and title are given, only that it is deliberate (in the "Editor of compilation" section of Template:Citation/core). I do not know what citation style this is following, but you should raise it there. Amalthea  09:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Template_talk:Citation/core. Debresser (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Support for "archiveurl"
Two transclusions of cite encyclopedia in history of the United States link to the now-dead Encarta encyclopedia. Someone added the "archiveurl"/"archivedate" parameters, however these links do not appear for the reader. For example:



produces:



This seems unexpected and a common source of errors for editors. The expected behavior would mimic cite web:



Can we update the behavior of this template? —Mrwojo (talk) 00:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That means somebody should add support for the relevant parameters to this template, which is always tricky. If I had a little more time, I'd work on it. But the idea is definitely a good one. Debresser (talk) 11:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * For now I've replaced the two examples I mentioned with cite web. Not the fault of this template, however some tools (Reflinks?) auto-correct cite web → cite encyclopedia without checking for this condition. —Mrwojo (talk) 16:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I also support adding parameters for archived urls. The web pages for the Norwegian encyclopedias Store norske leksikon and Norsk biografisk leksikon have been a bit too dynamic over the last five years&hellip; -- Eisfbnore talk 11:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Single page articles
The template as it stands at the moment seems to force the abbreviation "pp." before the page numbers, which is fine as long as there is more than one page. Is there any way to make it read just "p." if an article is only on one page? It looks very wrong to write ""pp. 140". This is relevant with many articles in the Encyclopedia of the Medieval Chronicle. See template:emc1.

Trans_title
Can we have a "trans_title" parameter as in cite web? I am using this template to refer to a Japanese (online) dictionary and having such parameter would be handy. bamse (talk) 07:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Editor parameter displays: In EDITOR
Is this right: LAST, FIRST; COAUTHORS (YEAR). "TITLE". In EDITOR. ENCYCLOPEDIA. VOLUME (EDITION izd.). shouldn be EDITOR ed. --Pinky sl (talk) 18:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Quote period
Of the 16 templates in Citation Style 1, only this one and Cite journal have a default period for the quote. This is currently under discussion at Template talk:Cite journal. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 12:37, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

✅ ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 18:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Typo
There happens to be a typo at the end of the page for the link. It says "ecample" instead of "example". Please fix it.WBJB003 (talk) 22:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Debresser (talk) 23:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposal for editorlinkn
Is it possible to have editorlink1, editorlink2, and so on?

I would have used them just now on Operation Overlord but sadly ...

Varlaam (talk) 17:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Not documented, but supported: editor-link or editor1-link through editor4-link. I will be going through all the doc pages soon and cleaning up. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 18:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I must have neglected to try the hyphen possibility. Some QA engineer, eh? Thx, Varlaam (talk) 18:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

✅ ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 11:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)