Template talk:EFloras

Flowering Plants of Nepal
Could someone with the appropriate knowledge of how the template works please adjust the title for parameter 110 that is currently "Flowering Plants of Nepal" to "Annotated Checklist of the Flowering Plants of Nepal" so that it will be clear to readers that the reference is not a fully developed flora? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ! The names are in the subtemplate eFloras/label. — Eru·tuon 01:41, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

To do

 * add family as a parameter, which can then be used to determine the volume number for the Flora of North America

color contrast and accessibility
please choose better background and foreground colors for the flora_id and taxon_id examples in §Usage. The current colors fail the color contrast tests at https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/: minimum contrast ratio should be 4.5:1
 * #FFD700 gold against #808080 gray: 2.82:1
 * #00FF00 lime against #808080 gray: 2.88:1

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1 § CS1 wrapper templates using "mode"
You are invited to join the discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1 § CS1 wrapper templates using "mode". Rjjiii (talk) 16:32, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Harv and Sfn no-target errors
Tagging major editors of this template who seem to still be active on Wikipedia: I guess that's you,. I use shortened footnotes Template:Sfn. When using the eFloras template, I set it up as shown below, calling it as a citation using this code:

The page is then placed in the hidden category Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. As you can see, the citation and reference both get formatted as you would expect, though. Is this a false-positive error? Is there a way around it? At times, I will need to use the same authors for multiple references, in which case the dates would be 2006a, 2006b, etc.





Thanks. Eewilson (talk) 19:56, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * is a citation template based on . It didn't start out that way but over time has evolved to be a citation template.  It would be better for this template to be renamed because there are drones out there that will overwrite a template's redirect name to the template's canonical name.
 * Use . That is just a redirect (so subject to being overwritten) but Module:Footnotes looks specifically for template names that begin with   (first letter case-insensitive) in the hope that it can find the information required to reconstruct a CITEREF link that matches the CITEREF anchor created by  inside :
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Well, that's a secret little undocumented trick. I'll try it and report back. Thank you . Eewilson (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Both eFloras and Cite/cite eFloras are creating what looks like an appropriate CITEREF prefixed tag. The latter still places the page in the hidden category Harv and Sfn no-target errors. :/ Eewilson (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Where? Examples?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have multiple examples, but take a look at Symphyotrichum racemosum. It is the one I have been using in the past half hour to test this. Eewilson (talk) 21:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This one? Which links to a templat e that looks like this:
 * That is not an template; is not named .  Perhaps another example?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You must have seen that in the history. I did add the IPNI template today, but there are 3 calls to Cite eFloras (previously just eFloras) which have been there for some time. They are what are causing the problem. I can revert the IPNI template addition to uncomplicate things if you wish. Eewilson (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you having a caching problem? I commented out all reference to  and previewed.  The article did not show error messages nor did it get added to.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * IPNI isn't the problem. It's the eFloras template. I suppose it could be a problem, but that's not what I'm talking about. We are looking at eFloras. Also, it doesn't seem to update the hidden categories on preview (I've tried it), only after you save. Then you can go back in and see the updated hidden categories. Eewilson (talk) 21:42, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * What editor are you using? Do you have 'Show previews without reloading the page' (Special:Preferences) enabled?  I'm using the generic (2010) wikitext editor.  'Show previews without reloading the page' is disabled.  Special:Preferences → 'Show hidden categories' is enabled so when I commented out  and previewed, the hidden cat list at the bottom of the page was updated to show that  was no longer present.
 * I know that we're talking about ; I do not see any errors except for the single error associated with.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I use the Wikitext editor whatever the default version is. I'll go make sure my preferences are set as you have yours, then check again. How do you know it's the IPNI error? Is there a place that tells you where the error occurs? Eewilson (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Error messaging emitted by and other short-form templates can be made visible.  See method three at.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay! So I changed the IPNI call to a Cite web and the error is gone. Want me to go to the IPNI template talk page and report the problem there? Eewilson (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, I'm going to find one that has the eFloras template without the IPNI template and see if I can get rid of the errors (which I believe occur) there by using Cite eFloras. Eewilson (talk) 22:41, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , see Symphyotrichum novi-belgii which is an example showing the CITEREF sfn notarget error for Cite eFloras. Eewilson (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I emptied my cache and cookies for wikipedia.org but that did not affect it. Eewilson (talk) 23:13, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You have discovered an odd bug (probably in Module:Footnotes/anchor id list). When a positional parameter immediately precedes a name-holding parameter (in this case last1) that name-holding parameter is ignored.  In Symphyotrichum racemosum all of the  templates have a named parameter (20) immediately ahead of Brouillet.  But, in Symphyotrichum novi-belgii, the unnamed parameter   immediately precedes Brouillet.  Change   to Symphyotrichum novi-belgii and the error goes away.
 * I'll see if I can figure out where the bug is.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Well would you look at that! I'll be curious to see the end results of your investigation. Thank you so much for your time on this today! Eewilson (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It can't be the  parameter, though, because that is set as Flora of North America. It would make more sense to be  . Eewilson (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Or actually  but in that case, the formatting (italics) has to be sent as well, but it does appear to be the correct parameter. Other option is to just put it before the volume parameter. Eewilson (talk) 23:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I used title only as an example to show that the problem does not exist if a positional parameter does not immediately precede a name-holding parameter. I have tweaked Module:Footnotes/anchor id list.  There is probably a better fix to be had but that will have to wait for another day.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 00:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It can't be the  parameter, though, because that is set as Flora of North America. It would make more sense to be  . Eewilson (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Or actually  but in that case, the formatting (italics) has to be sent as well, but it does appear to be the correct parameter. Other option is to just put it before the volume parameter. Eewilson (talk) 23:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I used title only as an example to show that the problem does not exist if a positional parameter does not immediately precede a name-holding parameter. I have tweaked Module:Footnotes/anchor id list.  There is probably a better fix to be had but that will have to wait for another day.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 00:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

maint message: no publisher for FNA
I don't have the brain power or time to do this right now; just leaving a note here for someone to pick this up and add

Oxford University Press

for the Flora of North America section to that code so the message "CS1 maint: location missing publisher" will be resolved. TIA. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 05:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * pinging in case you don't follow the talk page. It appears to be a relatively new maintenance message. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Simply looking at the template name:, leads one to believe that the template is intended to cite something at http://www.efloras.org/. The lead sentence in the template's documentation seems to support that.  So then I have to wonder, why does the template need location for an online source?
 * Shouldn't be more a  citation than a  citation?  If the intent is to actually cite the print version of Flora of North America North of Mexico (for example) then do so using  (?).  If the intent is to cite the online information at eFloras.org then do so with a  template.  Compare current live :
 * with this simulation that uses :
 * – volume omitted because not supported by
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna have to study what you wrote to give a better reply. FNA is a published book, Flora of North America North of Mexico, in many volumes with the same or possibly more text than what is published online. This is likely why Cite book has been used, although that was before my time. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 11:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * – volume omitted because not supported by
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna have to study what you wrote to give a better reply. FNA is a published book, Flora of North America North of Mexico, in many volumes with the same or possibly more text than what is published online. This is likely why Cite book has been used, although that was before my time. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 11:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna have to study what you wrote to give a better reply. FNA is a published book, Flora of North America North of Mexico, in many volumes with the same or possibly more text than what is published online. This is likely why Cite book has been used, although that was before my time. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 11:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

eFloras is dead?
As of this writing, it appears that eFloras is dead; I'm pretty sure that this url once worked: http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=233501007

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * yes, it seems that http://www.efloras.org has disappeared, or at least no longer works right now. The online Flora of North America is at http://floranorthamerica.org. Sigh... Peter coxhead (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * it seems to have been an intermittent problem lately; back up again now. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)