Wikipedia talk:ProveIt/Archive 2019

References and templates not loading
I was in the process of using the tool today to add a reference. When trying to add, I noticed none of the other references on the article were loading. When trying to paste in a new URL to add, none of the templates "cite web, cite news, etc" were loading either. Is this a common error? Red Director (talk) 18:36, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Having the same issue. No templates available and the list of existing references is 0. SunnyLetO (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Also noticed this. It has been useless for a few days because of this. - R9tgokunks   ⭕  21:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I forgot how to manually do citations.. someone please fix this!-- ☾Loriendrew☽  ☏(ring-ring)  00:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Started a bug report (see tracking link)-- ☾Loriendrew☽  ☏(ring-ring)  00:16, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the bug report. After some research, it looks like the cause is T213953 which is tagged as "Unbreak now!". Let's give the team a bit more time to fix it. --Sophivorus (talk) 02:27, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like the gadget is working now. Thanks to all that worked on it! Red Director (talk) 22:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Anyone else running into trouble again? I can't get it to load. Snickers2686 (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The add button does not work for me. Kailash29792 (talk)  09:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

cite wikisource
Hi, I couldnot find the cite wikisource template in the prove it gadget. Is it possible to add them too? -- Balaji  (Let's talk) 18:38, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Disabling or at least changing automatic edit summaries
I tried using this bit of code on my JavaScript page, having found it in the archives:



Being a good boy, I had gone looking to make sure I wasn't beating a dead horse by starting a new thread on this topic, but it seems this code did not work, at least not the way I thought it did. If it can't be disabled, can we at least change it? Right now it just says a reference was "edited" with ProveIt, but this implies an reference was changed via ProveIt, without implying whether a new one altogether were added yet both are possible with ProveIt. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 22:08, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Cite news and cite magazine
Is it possible to make the fields "authorlink", "archiveurl", "archivedate" and "deadurl" readily available in cite news as it is in cite web? Also, the field "chapter" must be removed from cite magazine as it is not recognised by the template's documentation.-- Kailash29792 (talk)  04:44, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Function request - Integrate with Reference Tooltips
It would really be great to add ProveIt to Reference Tooltips. I'll explain what I mean by describing the desired user experience.

A. To prevent abuse, have this option disabled by default B. Logged in users can turn it on from preferences, and then.... C. ''QUESTION... if edit mode has an editing window, what do we call "reading mode"? Well I'll use "reading window" to continue...'' D. In the reading window, if I hover over a reference footnote, I tooltips appears. E. I would like a button in the tooltips pop that would
 * 1. Flip to edit mode
 * 2. Automatically go to the reference
 * 3. Automatically open the proveit window for that reference
 * 4. It would be really nice if there were also a way to save changes and go back to the reading window where I left off, but that might be asking for the moon.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Add button
Although the template now works, I cannot add new references via ProveIt. Only edit existing ones, which is not enough. Is there anything being done about this? -- Kailash29792 (talk)  07:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I too have found this, I just tried to add a tweet as a reference to Danniella Westbrook, when I clicked on "add" nothing happened. Had to copy and paste the template manually.  In case it helps I'm editing using a Samsung Chromebook.   are you also using Chrome or another operating system?-- 5 albert square (talk) 14:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, Chrome is my primary browser. Now the add button works erratically. Kailash29792 (talk)  15:02, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I just tried it just now and sometimes just the "add" button wouldn't work. Other times that didn't work and it didn't pick up that there were other references either.  I've installed the classic ProveIt now and that seems to be working - the only trouble is that's outdated.  It doesn't have anything like cite tweet etc.-- 5 albert square (talk) 19:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * tagging you in this as you're the team lead for ProveIt.-- 5 albert square (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm looking into it. I think it may actually be related to changes in the TemplateData API. I requested permissions to be able to edit the gadget code, as my previous permissions expired. Support would be useful, thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * it looks like you have a response on that page!-- 5 albert square (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Well I got the global interface permission and I fixed an issue that seems to have been the cause of the Add button bug. However I'm not 100% sure as I was getting this bug only erratically. Please confirm with your own experience and let me know. Cheers! --Sophivorus (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Now I am able to add refs normally, but ProveIt shows  whenever I try to edit a section that contains refs using  and  . -- Kailash29792  (talk)  18:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Works ok for me but I only used template citenews. Can't confirm if the others work ok.-- 5 albert square (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Grant to enhance the gadget
I just requested a rapid grant to enhance the gadget. The general reasons are explained there, but I'd like to mention that part of the time will be spent in doing the fixes and enhancements you request here. Please feel free to add any comments, questions, requests and endorsements, thanks! --Sophivorus (talk) 16:54, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd like to request the gadget be expanded to include all existing Citation Style 1 templates. It would also be awesome if there was somehow a built-in functionality to auto-archive a url to wayback machine and archive.today. I have a browser plugin to do that right now, but I mostly use it when editing sources with ProveIt. -Furicorn (talk) 19:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * any thoughts on the enhancement for built-in archiving functionality? -Furicorn (talk) 04:19, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Definitely doable, if the grant gets approved (thanks for the support, btw). I can imagine a button next to the URL fields (similar to the "Today" button in date fields, that changes a URL for it's latest version in the WayBack machine. Sounds good? Sophivorus (talk) 12:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, happy to help you help me! I think your suggestion is a fine place to start, but I was thinking something more like this add-on: it adds a button to my browser that lets me archive a page in its current state. It would be great if I could save a step and archive directly from within Wikipedia. Even better would be if (similar to the add-on) it could also look at archive.is in cases where the link is dead and Wayback Machine doesn't have a save. -Furicorn (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi! It seems like the evaluator misunderstood the grant proposal, rejected it out of said misunderstanding, and now ignores all clarifications given on the grant talk page. For anyone interested in seeing this grant granted, you may want to check it out. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

ProveIt reverses author order from PLOS one
Hi,

Using ProveIt with URL https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213314 produces

which reverses the author order for authors 3 to 11 and drops the first 2


 * Hi I removed your  tags so it shows the reversal your trying to demonstrate, and doesn't throw the references to the bottom of the talk page. -Furicorn (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I also took a look at your issue, I think your problem is not with ProveIt. ProveIt just fills in, so I think the bug is with . Help talk:Citation Style 1 is a better place to mention this bug, although I don't know how responsive they are. -Furicorn (talk) 09:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The cite journal template is rendering correctly here. If ProveIt is omitting listed authors and putting others in the wrong order, it is likely that there is a bug in ProveIt or that the data it is being fed is formatted incorrectly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Template:Cite episode
, whenever I load this template via ProveIt, it only shows too fields readily: "series" and "source date". Is it possible to make other fields like "episode title", "episode article", "series article", "network", "season number" and "episode number" too readily available? Whenever citing an episode as a source, these particular fields are necessary to fill. -- Kailash29792 (talk)  12:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the reason only two show up is because ProveIt reads the TemplateData as entered. You can see the TemplateData if you scroll to the bottom of Template:Cite episode. It looks like whoever setup the template data only marked two fields as required, and none as suggested. I tried editing it for you to make the ones you mentioned , but I kept getting JSON errors when I previewed it. You might have to ask for help on the talk page for that template, or on Wikipedia talk:TemplateData. -Furicorn (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

How do I switch references from one to another easily?
As the title refers. Wei4Green &#124; 唯绿远大 (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Suggested wording change
Reference(s) edited with ProveIt instead of "Reference edited with ProveIt". I often add/edit more than one reference when I use the tool. WanderingWanda (talk) 04:40, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I feel there shouldn't even be an edit summary saying something like "Reference(s) edited with ProveIt". Because there is always "Tag: ProveIt edit" whenever you make an edit with the gadget. -- Kailash29792 (talk)  04:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree. It just makes for a wordier, less readable summary. But if this text is added, please also include a space before it. RockMagnetist(talk) 16:06, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that the edit summary is generally useless. It can be removed on a per-wiki basis by deleting the proveit-summary config option in the initialization script. I can do that if no one opposes. However, I just noticed that the "Tag: ProveIt edit" links to meta:Grants:IEG/Enhance the ProveIt gadget but should probably link to ProveIt. That I cannot change myself and we should request a fix to an authorized user. Agree? Sophivorus (talk) 13:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Certainly. Kailash29792 (talk)  16:53, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't have known about ProveIt, Twinkle, or many other tools unless if was in the edit summary. I think keeping it is helpful, especially for new editors.MartinezMD (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

oclc, worldcat, |location=, |place=
created this:

In cs1|2, location and place are synonymous aliases. As the error message shows, having both in the same citation is not allowed.

When a cs1|2 template has oclc, setting url to point at the same oclc identifier is redundant. url should link to free-to-read sources; WorldCat urls rarely if ever, link to free-to-read sources. Yeah, from WorldCat is is sometimes possible to link to a Google books preview of a book but that can also be done through Special:BookSources/&lt;isbn> (which also includes a link to WorldCat).

Please refrain from adding synonymous parameters and from adding WorldCat urls to url.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Correct date format for Month Year.
When citing an academic paper, like doi:10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.02.063 it gets Month Year in this format: 2017-4

Wikipedia currently doesn't support it, see it here: Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers

I would suggest to be written: May 2017, or abbreviated when needed, like Sep, Oct, Nov, etc.

—Arthurfragoso (talk) 22:07, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Automatic retrieve other information: PMID, PMC, ISSN and publisher.
I don't know how you retrieve information, but most medical and biochemical articles have a PMID, and some have a PMC.

Provided a DOI number, it's possible to get the other IDs at:

Usually the .ris file provided by Google Scholar usually also contains the ISSN and the publisher.

I also found this API: https://api.altmetric.com/v1/doi/10.1007/s00424-017-2061-4

The problem is what could be done when two ISSN is resulted? We assign only the first?

But automatically retrieving just PMID and PMC would already be great!

Thanks!

—Arthurfragoso (talk) 22:46, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I looked at the code, and probably it's better to ask citoid for that, so I did: —Arthurfragoso (talk) 03:10, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

It's now fixed the the Wikipedia retrieving from NIH servers. Enjoy! :) —Arthurfragoso (talk) 22:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Grant granted
Hi! Just wanted to let you know that the grant for improving the gadget I requested was finally approved. In the coming two months I'll be working on the gadget intensively, so it's the best time to do all the feature requests and bug reports you want, but PLEASE do them at the Phabricator project, not here. I'm starting with the most difficult and radical change, namely to add support for the visual editor and the new wikitext editor. After that, I'll focus on adding requested features and fixing reported bugs. Thanks for your help and support! Sophivorus (talk) 14:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Finally, after much work and delays, I've updated ProveIt. For now it's only enabled here on the English Wikipedia, so please let me know of any bugs so that I may fix them before updating other wikis. I've only been able to test it on the latest Chrome, so I'm particularly interested to know if it works well on other browsers. The main change introduced by the new version is that it now works with the new wikitext editor, check it out! If the page is too big or your computer too slow, changes done via ProveIt on the new wikitext editor may take some seconds, but should work. Also there're some interface changes, a couple new features and optimizations, minor bug fixes, and huge internal architectural changes required for the new wikitext editor. I hope you like it. From now on, if all goes well, I'll be working mainly on bug fixes, feature requests, and spreading the gadget to new wikis. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Congrats and thanks! What a great tool NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Enhancement Request
The current tool inserts references wherever the cursor is, which is usually in the text itself. For articles using List-Defined References, please provide an option to insert just the reference name at the cursor and the full citation appended to the list (usually in or  ) NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:39, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I made a minor tweak so that the Cite button is available when inserting a new reference. This allows you to cite the reference you're creating at the place where the cursor is, and then scroll down to the  template or the   tags and insert the full reference there. I hope this is good enough, since automating the whole thing properly would actually be very complicated, because the name of the   template varies per wiki, as well as the parameters of the template, among other things. Sophivorus (talk) 17:13, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Huh.
ProveIt just vanished. Is it working for everyone else? Guy (Help!) 19:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It's probably related to the changes I made (check my post above). Please make sure you're loading the latest JavaScript and CSS (do a hard refresh with shift + ctrl + R) and let me know if the issue persists and if you notice any possible clues. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 22:24, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I second Guy. It too isn't loading for me, even after I did shift + ctrl + R. -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  03:31, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I reset my preferences to default, re-enabled and it started working again. Guy (help!) 10:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I use Firefox with auto updating. Haven't had any hiccups NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks all! could you check your JavaScript console (right click anywhere > inspect > console) and let me know of any suspicious errors? Sophivorus (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I reset my preferences and am slowly re-enabling them, still no success. It doesn't work for me even in Firefox. I don't know what to find under inspect > console, just that I found errors which I don't fully understand. -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  13:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for the patience. Can you maybe share a screenshot or copy-paste of the errors? Also, are you using the latest Firefox? Sophivorus (talk) 13:29, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Does resetting preferences blank common.js? Maybe Kailash29792 has something in there that is creating a conflict? (I'm just making this up, don't really know what I'm talking about) NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Here is the screenshot. Anything I should do to fix this? -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  14:57, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing! Given the amount of errors you're getting and NewsAndEventsGuy suggestion, I took a look at your common.js and it seems you have several user scripts running. I suspect there's an incompatibility somewhere. Can you temporarily remove all your user scripts, and see if ProveIt loads ok? If it does, then I will try to figure out which script/s are causing the issue. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 15:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Removed all scripts, anything being done on your side? -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  15:40, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Log out, clear cache, log back in. Does it work now? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand this can be annoying. But if I'm not able to reproduce the problem or determine the cause, I can't fix it. Given that ProveIt works for me and others, there must be something different about your situation that we need to pin down. Did ProveIt work after removing the scripts? Thanks again! Sophivorus (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you get me an unblocked link plese? --BEANS X2 (talk) 08:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I just tried adding all of your scripts to my common.js and ProveIt still loads fine for me (though I did get a bunch of errors and warnings from the scripts). So maybe it's something else. Are you using the latest Firefox or Chrome? If yes, give me some time to think about the errors in the screenshot you shared. Sophivorus (talk) 15:59, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Both my Chrome and Firefox softwares are up to date. I even logged out and cleared cache on both browsers. Still no success, even HotCat doesn't work for me. Should I disable something here? <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  16:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Proceeding on the assumption that just one of them is the culprit, work in binary.  disable 1/2.  Clear cache, try again.  If it still doesn't work disable 1/2 of the remaining 1/2.  Binary is the fasted troubleshooting way to isolate a cause.  Disclaimer... there's always that odd chance that it's the combination of two or more of them, but save that for later.  NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , any update? <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  15:57, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think I just fixed the issue (thanks to your screenshot). Could you confirm? Sophivorus (talk) 19:30, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, ProveIt now works again, thank you. But I do not understand why the text reference is no longer blue selected when I click the same ref in the gadget. Also, whenever I try adding a new ref, why do I see all the fields readily, in contrast to the time when cite web showed only URL, title, first and last names, date, access-date, archive-url, archive-date and dead-url? Many fields appear twice. Also, dead-url template is apparently deprecated, so please see this discussion before considering keeping it/removing it from ProveIt. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  03:43, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm glad it works now. As to the other issues, I fixed them already, thanks for letting me know. Regarding dead-url, ProveIt shows the parameters that the template data tells it to show, so this kind of issues should be fixed from the template. I'd do it myself but I understand it's already resolved. The only issue I'm not quite sure about is when you say "the text reference is no longer blue selected when I click the same ref in the gadget". Is this still happening? Could you describe it better, or report it on Phabricator? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 17:00, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Now it's working fantastically, thank you. If a new problem occurs, I'll report it on Phabricator, rather than bloat this section. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  17:05, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Daily Sportscar
Could you add author and date recognition for dailysportscar.com? Bobi.1 (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand the issue, but it's probably related to Citoid rather than ProveIt (ProveIt uses the Citoid service without modifying it). Could you describe the issue in more detail so we can be sure? Sophivorus (talk) 17:04, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Automatic references
I have been trying to use the gadget over the last few days. Certain sites that used to load easy in the interface are left loading. It is not picking up any data for references on sites it used to be easy to pick up on. Is this a common issue? Red Director (talk) 14:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for reaching out! Could you link me to one or more of those sites you're having trouble with? Sophivorus (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back so quickly! ESPN.com and USA Today have a lot of news articles I like to use in references. Those used to load quickly in the interface. The style had updated but those sites still worked. This issue for me is only a few days old. Red Director (talk) 13:00, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again! I just tried creating an automatic reference from https://www.espn.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/story/_/id/10997032/top-ranked-qb-kyler-murray-commits-texas-aggies and had no problems. Then I tried from https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/01/kyler-murray-nfl-draft-height-tall-oklahoma-football-baseball-size-oakland-a and also had no trouble. Are you still experiencing this issue? Could you describe the steps to reproduce it, or maybe share a screenshot including the JavaScript console (right click anywhere > inspect > console) when you notice the issue? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No issues as of late! Thanks for your help Red Director (talk) 17:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Access date
Is there any way of making it so that the gadget produces "accessdate", rather than "access-date". The mods who go around correcting articles always correct "access-date" to "accessdate", so I assume the latter is the wiki standard? Beatpoet (talk) 14:25, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The canonical form is access-date; there was an RfC. In cs1|2 parameter names that are multi-word are hyphenated.  The allruntogetherforms, where they existed before the decision was taken to hyphenate, are supported but are not the preferred form.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If I can understand what you're saying, so mods who go through changing "access-date" to "accessdate" are technically wrong? Beatpoet (talk) 20:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know who you mean by mods – if that is a shortened form of 'moderators', en.wiki doesn't have any of those. Regardless, whomever is changing from the canonical access-date to accessdate (especially if that is all that they are doing – merely cosmetic edits) they are wrong and should stop doing that.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Automatic maximization
I along with a few other users from WP:Discord also reported issues with ProveIt over the last few days. In my case, I've noticed that it has begun to maximize itself whenever I click "show preview" and gets in the way, even when I make non-content-related edits. Ionmars10 (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , I second Ionmars10. Is anything being done about this? -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  15:05, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! I tried editing a reference with ProveIt in the classic wikitext editor, then clicking on "Show preview", and ProveIt appearened minimized as it should. Then I tried the same with the new wikitext editor, but ProveIt caused no trouble either. Are you still experiencing this issue? Could you describe the steps to reproduce it, or maybe share a screenshot including the JavaScript console (right click anywhere > inspect > console) when you notice the issue? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * There's something fishy going on here. The ProveIt window occasionally loading and the refs being clickable, but you can't edit them or add new refs. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  10:56, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ahh yes, I noticed that issue a few times while developing, but not lately. Anyway, I added a somewhat redundant line of code that should patch it, but let me know if it happens again. Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Sophivorus, this section may be closed. There are still lingering problems, but I'll open a new section about them. -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  17:10, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

New problems
Ever since the earlier glitches were solved, some more have come... albeit not as problematic. One issue is, some cite templates do not show the title (even when the field is entered), only the URL, for eg: cite web. Here's a start. And the add button doesn't work sometimes. I don't know if this is a gadget glitch or if the add button only doesn't work in select computers, because in some it works. -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  16:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * With the new version (see below) the problem with the Add button may be fixed, please let me know if it ever happens again! As to the other issue, I'll take note and try to fix it soon, thanks for your patience! Sophivorus (talk) 15:27, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

New version, again
Hi! I just released a new version, again. Please allow some minutes for the latest code to get through the caches. The main new feature this time is that ProveIt now detects and is able to manage citation templates outside the tags, such as in the Bibliography and Further reading sections of some articles. Another neat feature is that ProveIt now detects all aliases of citation templates (such as Template:Cite website for Template:Cite web). I also added a little arrow next to each reference or template to navegate to it without opening the edit form, did some optimizations to avoid unnecessary load on the servers, and other minor features and bug fixes. As always, I did my best to test the new version and fix any bugs, but I may have missed some. Feedback is appreciated either here or at the Phabricator project. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 15:24, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Sophivorus! I want to begin by thanking you for your work on this gadget. It is a very useful tool. Nevertheless after the latest update, there is a small issue when I use ProveIt on the French version of Wikipedia. When I use the button "normaliser toutes les références", on the bottom right, it erases the content of the template "Article détaillé" (kind of an equivalent of the template "Template:Main"), like here. --Iniți (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed! Sophivorus (talk) 14:50, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking at the issue. Unfortunately, now the gadget is transforming the templates   and  into  --Iniți (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * This is expected behavior, since "Article détaillé" redirects to "Article" so the gadget "normalizes" the template name. Is this a problem? Could you explain why? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * "Article détaillé" is the the same than Template:Main. It is a totally different thing than "Article" which is the same than Template:Cite journal. I don't really know what to add. Sorry id it's not clear, I know every language version has its own particularities. --Iniți (talk) 17:37, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , please look at Template:Article détaillé. It is a redirect to Template:Main. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:37, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry for all the confusion, I misinterpreted the issue and actually fixed another bug! But now I think I got it right. Let me know if any other issue pops up, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems to be working without any problem. Thank you. --Iniți (talk) 04:57, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Duplicated citation templates
Anyone else having an issue where clicking "Update" causes the new template to be inserted twice inside the tag? Here's an example of this where I was trying to update a bare URL: Special:Diff/920796644 Ionmars10 (talk) 22:40, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the report! While developing, I encountered this issue a few times and fixed it, but it seems that under some specific circumstances it's still happening. If you figure out the steps necessary to reproduce the issue, please let me know. Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I still have it. Firefox 64-bit on Windows 10. Also the edit box is pinned as a ribbon under the page, rather than the popup-is that intentional? Guy (help!) 21:33, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Does the duplicate template issue happen every time you click on Update? If not, then please detail the steps to reproduce it. As to the other issue, can you share a screenshot? Sophivorus (talk) 21:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Apparently not, since it just didn't. Bah! Who loves intermittent faults? Guy (help!) 23:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * File:Proveit-a.PNG (Firefox); File:Proveit-b.PNG (Chrome, and Firefox was like this previously). Guy (help!) 23:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Duplicate wikitext issue fixed! Hopefully without causing new bugs. Sophivorus (talk) 21:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Pipe breaks parsing
ProveIt gave me the following: It's done this a few times. Guy (help!) 09:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh man, that seems like a nasty bug. Never happened to me before. I'll do some tests during the week to try to reproduce it, but if you notice any pattern to reproduce it, let me know! Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 12:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Easy to reproduce and probably a result of the WaPo's article titling method - the "title=" includes a pipe character. That "url=" URI will reliably reproduce the issue I think. Incidentally, a pipe in "title=" is common and throws a rendering error, if a pipe exists in the parsed title you can usually ignore everything to the left of it. Guy (help!) 12:34, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * When ProveIt finds a pipe, it assumes a new parameter starts, and if that parameter contains no = sign, it assumes it's an anonymous parameter. However, I'm now reading at Help:CS1 errors that CS1 templates have no anonymous parameters and therefore I should change the behavior so that ProveIt ignores the text after the pipe. But some other Wikipedias DO allow and even use anonymous parameters in their citation templates! So this complicates things. I think this points to a per-wiki configuration switch at MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.js, unless someone has a better idea? Sophivorus (talk) 22:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you may be looking at this the wrong way round. If the website's TITLE parameter includes a pipe character (as that URI does) then the text to the left of the pipe can usually be ignored - a simple split("|") and take the last element will do it. Guy (help!) 22:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Clicking Insert changes the button for Update
When I click "Insert" to insert a reference then move away in the edit window (type new text or whatever), the ProveIt box blanks its fields, as it always has, but the Insert button remains at Update and adding a new source in the box results in the previous one being overwritten - to add a new source you have to click Back then Add reference again. I think this is a change, I seem to recall that in the old days if you moved on in the document you'd get a fresh reference box with the Insert button. Guy (help!) 09:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * So lets see if I understand: when you insert a reference, the Insert button changes to Update, and then when you try to insert another reference (without clicking Back and Add again) the reference is updated rather than a new one inserted. Is this correct? If so, then this is expected (new) behavior, but the form shouldn't have been blanked, so I just fixed that. My reasoning is that it's probably more frequent to insert a reference and then want to change something, than to insert several references in a row. Do you agree? Anyone else wants to leave an opinion on what should be the default behavior? Sophivorus (talk) 21:39, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is the behaviour I am seeing. I actually don't care whether it stays on the current source and you have to click Back or if it goes back to the list. Either is fine. Guy (help!) 22:27, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well then, I'll follow my reasoning for now and leave it as it is (fixed). Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 22:46, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Gadget disappeared
I found when I'm editing articles recently, the gadget disappeared. What happened? <span style="border-radius:20px;background:#00785D;padding:0 5px;font-family:微软雅黑;color:#fff" class=nowrap> Wei4Green ·  唯绿远大  02:16, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Can confirm that I'm having the same problem. After I press the preview button it appears though. Ionmars10 (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you using Firefox? Does it happen every time? Or only sometimes? If it happens only sometimes, can you determine the conditions where it happens? Also, when it happens, can you scroll to the bottom of the page to see if the gadget can be found there, like in the issue reported above by ? Sophivorus (talk) 21:21, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * @Sophivorus: Yes. I am using Firefox. It happens everytime recently. I think I don't have this problem when I first used Firefox to edit. I scrolled down to the bottom and found nothing. Also, I never got a notification from you pinging me which is another strange thing.


 * Update: I just saw the gadget at the very bottom. It looks really weird and inconvenient with it at the very bottom. <span style="border-radius:20px;background:#00785D;padding:0 5px;font-family:微软雅黑;color:#fff" class=nowrap> Wei4Green ·  唯绿远大  23:13, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I am seeing the same thing with Firefox. – Daybeers (talk) 07:34, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It seems that the gadget only "disappears" while I have my Firefox built-in "Find in This Page..." tool activated. No need to worry anymore. <span style="border-radius:20px;background:#00785D;padding:0 5px;font-family:微软雅黑;color:#fff" class=nowrap> Wei4Green ·  唯绿远大  00:18, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that the gadget only goes to the bottom when you have the "Find in This Page..." tool activated??? Can you confirm this? Unfortunately I don't have access to a computer with Firefox today to test it myself. Sophivorus (talk) 12:10, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * @User:Sophivorus: Yes. <span style="border-radius:20px;background:#00785D;padding:0 5px;font-family:微软雅黑;color:#fff" class=nowrap> Wei4Green ·  唯绿远大  01:39, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm also having issues with the gadget in Firefox. The gadget either doesn't appear or it is stuck at the bottom of the page. I can drag it back up to the edit window but it is locked in position, not floating. Sometimes, and not reproducibly, it works correctly. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I can't see it whether or not the find tool is activated. I'm using Firefox 70.0 64-bit on Windows 10. – Daybeers (talk) 07:13, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the feedback. I'm currently out of town and stuck with a Chromebook, so I cannot install Firefox to test for this issue. I'll tackle it during the weekend. Thanks for the patience and any further info may be of great use! Sophivorus (talk) 12:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I put the two screen grabs in the section above, by the way. Guy (help!) 12:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you've changed something, but ProveIt occasionally floats correctly today. It's still usually stuck at the bottom though. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No sorry, I couldn't progress on this. I did get access to a computer with Firefox and did some testing, but I couldn't reproduce the issue. Today I did some minor tweaks to the CSS that may just fix it, but it would be pure luck. Again, please let me know if you notice any changes or clues! Sophivorus (talk) 22:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Previously, it wasn't working 95% of the time. Now, I can't get it to not work. The ProveIt box is properly sized when expanded and floats correctly, instead of being stuck at the bottom of the page and expanding to 100% width., how's it look for you? --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:43, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Problem with the update buttons
Hi ! It seems to be a problem with the update buttons (the main one and the ones in each reference). They are available and pressable, but then nothing happens. Thank you in advance for giving a look. Iniți (talk) 10:26, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , yes I've noticed this happening of late; the update button only works if the ref is changed in some manner (for eg: changing the link or adding extra parameters). Quite annoying, and even the "normalize everything" seems to have become meaningless., your help is needed. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  11:01, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Should be fixed now, hopefully without causing new bugs. Just give the cache a few minutes to catch up. Thanks for the report! Sophivorus (talk) 13:31, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Question
What does 'Normalise everyhting' do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.4.5 (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I too am curious to know more about this feature. Would there happen to be any user documentation for the current version? -Furicorn (talk)

Floating broken again
On Firefox, once again the input control is not floating. As per the previous screengrab, the input is off the bottom of the page:

Also the following are still issues, see for example the output from:
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/10/deep-state-strikes-back-former-fbi-leaders-rebut-questions-about-russia-investigation/

which is rendered via the Load button as (highlights added):

which parses as:

I think you can see the issue there.

So:
 * Presence of a pipe character in the page title (e.g. "Opinion | This thing is a bit broken") results in cite errors, I recommend the pipe character is substituted with a colon if found in any field.
 * Washington Post articles (only, as far as I can tell) generate garbage in the author fields.

Keep up the good work, Guy (help!) 13:57, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Per this error explanation, pipes in title should be replaced with . – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am also experiencing the error with ProveIt being at the very bottom instead of floating in FF - it seems to happen more often on the Visual Editor but not on the classic editor -Furicorn (talk) 17:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Compatabilitie with new feature?
Does ProveIt support Refined Book Refrencing? If not, could it be updated to support it? Thanks, BEANS X2 (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Also noticed that ProveIt is not available as a gadget on the Beta Cluster. --BEANS X2 (talk) 07:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Removing references
In this version of an article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pete_Newell_(American_football)&oldid=918615878 I removed a reference and ProveIit did not pick up the additional invocations - I think this is because there was no space between the ref name and the self-closing slash, so &lt;ref name=bio/&gt; instead of &lt;ref name=bio /&gt;.

Also the float issue is still present, and pipes in titles and other parsed fields are still not replaced by |, resulting in parameter errors for a large number of commonly used sources. Guy (help!) 10:08, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

order of fields when "normalizing"
Hi. Thank you for maintaining this tool. I had often wondered if there was something that would do what "normalize" now does. For messy articles, it's a big help.

But it took me a while to realize that the order of fields chosen for cite templates is not ideal. With books, "URL" becomes the first parameter; this is often a google books link, which is long and makes the whole template hard to parse. Shouldn't the order of fields roughly follow how they display in a citation? By far the most counterproductive aspect of normalizing right now is that it moves the author name further inside the template, while the author name is what displays first in output. And the author name is how people might "eyeball" a citation template when working with it. The only exception here is "cite journal", where it keeps the author names in the beginning. Example diff; mostly journal cites, but some books I wonder if there is strategy at play here, or if you would consider adjusting this very useful feature? I am hesitant to use it now because I think it is counterproductive to move the author information further inside the templates. Thanks, Outriggr (talk) 08:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The parameter order when normalizing is determined by the  field in the template data of the templates. I think you should just edit the template data (here) without further asking, and if no one reverts, it's for the better. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 03:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This has been bugging me too, especially the fact that the tool split the author and editor parameters into four separate blocks. I was bold and changed the order of the parameters to more closely match the order in which the template renders citations (and in particular all the author and editor parameters are now ordered consecutively in two blocks without intervening parameters). I hope this is OK. Boghog (talk) 08:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)