Template talk:Cite gnis/Archive 1

Title?
Some have thought that "Geographic Names Information System" should be assigned to the  field of the Citation/core template. I think it is more rightly part of the name of the publisher. – droll  &#91;chat&#93;  04:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The disputed change is that I assigned "Geographic Names Information System" to Title parameter of Citation/core when it was previously assigned to the Other parameter. However, that change matches the code used in the similar template Cite ngs, which assigns "NGS data sheet" to the Title parameter:
 * Example:
 * Another similar template Cite bivouac does the same thing by assigning "Canadian Mountain Encyclopedia" to the work parameter of the Cite web template (which in turn assigns it to the Title parameter):
 * Example:
 * My edit also made Cite gnis generate the same output as using a combination of and gnis3, as shown in the following example from Template:gnis/doc):
 * Code:
 * Output:
 * According to Template:Cite web/doc, the work parameter is used when the "item is part of a larger 'work', such as a book, periodical or website":
 * Example:
 * I think that applies here, since the item being cited is a part of the larger work GNIS (http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/), which is one of many websites published by the USGS. -- Zyxw (talk) 07:36, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * You mention Cite ngs and Cite bivouac as possible precident. I wrote them too. I've got the flu right now I don't have the energy to work too hard on this right now. I feel uncomfortable saying that GNIS is a title or a work. It's not a book or even just a data set. It is some sort of ongoing process which generates a data set. My point is that using italics is the result of an historical process that lead to a reference style. I wonder if there is precedent here. I doubt there is anything in the MOS that could be applied in this case but I could be wrong and I haven't really checked. I'll give this more thought when I'm feeling better but for now, unless a precedent can be found for the use of italics, I think there is no reason to start a precedent here.


 * I have considered using italics for the feature name. If you check the source for the web page [ City of Mosier] it claims that the title is "GNIS Detail - City of Mosier". To be truthful I don't feel strongly about any of this. In the end I think that the readability of the output of the template is what matters and that should be as simple as possible. – droll   &#91;chat&#93;  14:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 January 2013
The template should use cite web's id param to display the given Feature ID.

The change is in the sandbox. —Mrwojo (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * A user can ascertain the id by clicking on the link. I what way would the additional data be generally useful?&#32;– droll  &#91;chat&#93;  22:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The Feature ID is the unique, permanent identifier for a GNIS feature. As demonstrated above, our citation text is vague without it. —Mrwojo (talk) 00:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that this would be a useful feature. Pages such as list of longest streams of Oregon have multiple GNIS features with the same names. (Rock Creek, for instance.)  Little Mountain  5  01:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Would it be satisfactory if this feature were added as an option.&#32;– droll  &#91;chat&#93;  02:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The identifying information should always be shown in a citation. If we're looking for ways to keep this template concise, we could make the name optional. —Mrwojo (talk) 02:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I strenuously object to this modification on the grounds that the additional text is is unnecessary and adds little of value in the general case.&#32;– droll  &#91;chat&#93;  05:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm also struggling to come up with a use case here. The Feature ID is a completely arbitrary string, right? Users aren't going to be able to compare different feature IDs except to note that they're different from one another. This doesn't seem to provide any particular value in a given article (users will not be able to tell two features called Rock Creek apart from the Feature ID, for instance). It's not like an ISBN where MediaWiki itself provides lookup support. Why are readers going to want to see the Feature ID? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * In a citation, even one with a URL, it's useful to show the Feature ID of GNIS in the same sense that it's useful to show the headword of a dictionary. The name is a poor way to reference the database, and right now that's what this template shows. —Mrwojo (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I've marked the edit request as answered for now. Please activate the edit protected template again when there is a consensus for what improvements, if any, should be made. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 19:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Links off
Some articles and lists use this template repeatedly, and the blue links get overwhelming. I've added a links off parameter in the sandbox which removes the links from Geographic Names Information System and United States Geological Survey when used; please sync the main template with it. Thanks,  Little  Mountain  5   16:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait a bit. I'd like to check this change for myself. Thanks. 18:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I changed your version a bit. Now only links works and not link. I guess I'm a bit fussy. Also the parameter value must be off. I'm an old coder (hacker) and I believe that vagueness leads to trouble. Maybe I'm being too fussy. If you think so then I'll change it. I also tweaked the error messages so they look more like the ones that cite web prints. If you OK with the changes then just restore the editprotected template. Thanks. – droll   &#91;chat&#93;  20:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Fine with me, restored. Cheers,  Little  Mountain  5   23:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't realize it at the time, but produces a slightly different output than when the links are left on. Please change the following code from:
 * publisher =

to:


 * publisher =

Thanks!  Little Mountain  5  17:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:35, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Text
Please expand the output text as follows. Thanks! • Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 06:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * From "Geographic Names Information System" to "Geographic Names Information System (GNIS)"
 * From "U.S. Geological Survey"             to "United States Geological Survey (USGS)"


 * Do you know of any reference in the MOS that would support this change. I, personally, don't see why this would be an improvement.&#32;– droll  &#91;chat&#93;  02:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Do you know of any reference saying that it shouldn't be changed? The Wikipedia article is the long form United States Geological Survey and really no reason to shorten it, and (GNIS) / (USGS) are common acronyms.  •  Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 08:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 9 October 2014
Please simplify the following two lines: | Geographic Names Information System, U.S. Geological Survey | Geographic Names Information System, U.S. Geological Survey}} to: | Geographic Names Information System, United States Geological Survey | Geographic Names Information System, United States Geological Survey}} This is the common use of both the full USGS name and the article title.

Thanks, Buaidh  04:55, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ — xaosflux  Talk 21:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 Jan 2015
Please add around the template code. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 02:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Why?  Use case?  Consensus discussion? —   16:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there anyone against this. This will simply remove the error message from the top of the template page itself. If no one is apposed, after a while I will reactivate this request AManWithNoPlan (talk) 23:20, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Does not add anything of use to this template. — xaosflux  Talk 03:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)