User talk:Rjwilmsi/Archives/2017/January

Reference errors on 31 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * On the Violence against women page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=757581213 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F757581213%7CViolence against women%5D%5D Ask for help])

Citation needed redirects
I think the only reason we bypass the citation needed redirects is because the treat them as citation templates in order to move punctuation accordingly. Am I right? Maybe, if we hardcode some of the redirects we could avoid the drama surrounded by this? -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:08, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think those template redirects affect ref punctuation as no or similar templates are relevant to that. However, I don't really think changing the template redirects page for some specific entries is the solution to this wider concern, when the real issue is that there are bot owners including you who are unwilling, and/or don't have the technical skills to, add appropriate before or after skip checks to bot tasks such that the bot only edits the page when it has found and fixed the intended issue. When a bot doesn't have the right checks and always runs a series of functions, it could make a wide range of possible cosmetic or trivial edits, of which template redirects is only one example.  Rjwilmsi  09:36, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * On the Plesiosauria page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=758417744 your edit] caused an unsupported parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F758417744%7CPlesiosauria%5D%5D Ask for help])

Reference errors on 13 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * On the Abraham Maslow page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=759887834 your edit] caused a redundant parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F759887834%7CAbraham Maslow%5D%5D Ask for help])

Edit Error
Hello,

Your edit here set 'pages=045016' for the 'bibcode=2007ERL.....2d5016A' reference; clearly an incorrect setting. I changed it to 'id=045016'. 17:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that's an error as such. Crossref gives 045016 as the page (starting page). Remember that pages is for the starting page or page range, not the number of pages/length of article, which your edit summary seems to suggest you think it's for. Journals that don't reset page numbers within a volume and use one volume for a year or so can and do reach tens of thousands of pages in the volume.
 * Though it's not necessarily quite that simple anyway as the same journals then may refer to the starting page number as an article ID. Looking at the template documentation I think id is for a unique identifier for the paper, which I'm not sure 045016 will be here (same starting page/article ID could be used in a different volume of the same journal), so at might be better, if you are still not comfortable with using page or pages. Rjwilmsi  18:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. The ADS entry lists it as the article id. When I look at the actual PDF download of the paper, the reference is listed as: Environ. Res. Lett. 2 (2007) 045016 (7pp). I.e. it's 7 pages. Something isn't giving a good result. Praemonitus (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure what the issue is here. It's a id internal to the journal (an article number, if you prefer), mostly because this is an electronic publication. It's used in lieu of pages. id in the sense of the template, is for bibliographic identifiers like doi/bibcode not covered by the core of the template. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, 045016 and 7 pages long is correct. You will notice that ADS has 5016 at the end of the bibcode where the starting page number is normally placed within the bibcode, or as many characters as are available if the page number is too long, so ADS blends starting page number and article ID as the same value. So typically we'd put 045016 or 045016 for such citations; with at being an alias of pages you could also put 045016 which would be equivalent, as the template also blends starting page number and article ID as the same value. However, neither the page or pages parameter are for the total number of pages / page length though, so that number 7 isn't relevant here, which I think is the point of confusion? Rjwilmsi  21:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)