Wikipedia talk:Citation templates

Sfn neglected
The section "Use in footnotes" starts with the sentence "For a citation to appear in a footnote, it needs to be enclosed in 'ref' tags." This gives the impression that REF tags are the only way. That is how I understood it, now a year ago, when I first learned to cite sources in Wikipedia. Clearly this is not the case as the Sfn template also generates a citation in a footnote. It took me a long time to discover Sfn, which I then preferred over the quite heavy-going REF.../REF for many reasons. I think the Sfn template, which Charlie Gillingham wrote in 2009, has still not found its deserved place in the Wikipedia documentation. - I might be wrong; perhaps most Wikipedians regret that Sfn was ever accepted and would like us all to exclusively use REF.../REF? Whatever might be the case, I do not want to edit this text without consensus and probably a newby like me is not the right person to do it. What do you all think of this? Johannes Schade (talk)

language parameters for English
I've been told by that the language parameter isn't to be used for English-language sorces. However, many of the citation templates include language otherwise, like this from cite book:. Should Template:Cite book/doc (and all others similarly) be updated to reflect the consensus refered to by 109.76.193.171? —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 02:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * That IP editor is incorrect. The documentation is correct. The archives of Help Talk:CS1 have discussions about this issue. That is where consensus is determined for Citation Style 1 citation templates, including cite book. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah! Many thanks for knowing more than I do!  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 03:21, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Jonesey95, I doubt you watched the above article after editing it, but with this reversion, 109.76.193.171 reverted you saying . —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 15:54, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in an edit war with someone who ignores WP:BRD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't either, but what is the appropriate next-step, if you don't mind my asking? Should it be taken to Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring?  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 19:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * My advice is (1) stop fretting about it, because it is a tiny thing, or barring that, (2) continue to follow the steps at Dispute resolution. It would also help to dig through the Help Talk:CS1 archives to see if you can find the discussions about why at least some people favor putting language=en into articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If memory serves, the decision to recommend retaining en arose from discussion at or related WP:MED and the translation of medical articles to other-language wikis.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Important parts of WP:BRD are WP:DISCUSS and WP:STATUSQUO and I reject the above assertion that I was not following the process. I also object to editors asserting that things are required when they cannot explain or show discussions to support their claims. It is also strange when an editor insists on strict markup formatting in one place and in another includes apparently optional unnecessary bloated markup. If the rules were half as clear as some editors claim, then supporting their arguments would be easy.

For the record user Fourthords found an old discussion which explained that "It was requested by editors who copy citations from en.WP to WP in other languages" and that resolved the matter. -- 109.79.160.61 (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinese book titles shouldn't be italicized
There are some articles that cite Chinese books. However the template would Italicize the Chinese characters. I wonder if there can be some way to stop this italicizing feature when it comes to Chinese characters or language. 2001:B011:7000:1613:84F0:68A:70DC:75F4 (talk) 03:23, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * for cs1|2 templates: script-title. See
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 12:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Mandatory title parameter
I see the title is required in Cite News, Web, and Citation templates or it generates an error. A lot of short newspaper articles over a hundred years old do not have a title because it required manually setting it in type for the printer, so they saved space by leaving it out. I'm using Cite News. Any suggestion on how to fill out the title field in these templates so they work? I've got the newspaper title, page, date, publisher, quote, and a url for books.google where the full newspaper has been visually scanned and archived (not in a book). The ref is going in a biography. Should I fiil in the title field with the bio subject's name, newspaper name, or use my best judgment to invent a title?  5Q5 &#124;&#9993; 12:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I was able able to find a title, but any suggestion for future use in filling out the parameter |title= when the publication omits it would be helpful.  5Q5 &#124;&#9993; 15:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * In such a situation, I usually write in the first few words, with an ellipsis. I think that’s the most sensible, and it does makes it easier to find the relevant item on the page. (That was in fact the good old way of doing things before they came up with this novel fad of giving titles to things.)
 * Alternatively, I have sometimes found a suitable title in a table of contents, although it does not appear in the text itself. I don’t think it would be the case for short newspaper articles however, more for government gazettes, for example. Keriluamox (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The proper way to cite US Senate and Congressional Documents?
What is the best way to accomplish this? 162.218.225.247 (talk) 09:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It is always helpful to give an example. If it is on the web, you can use cite web. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)