Template talk:cite-meta
Cited text in a separate quotation block
@JohnC5: I'm not sure it's a good idea to have {{cite-meta}} display the cited text in a separate quotation block, because the {{cite}} family of templates are used for citations in "References" sections (i.e., in footnotes) and "Further reading" sections. — SGconlaw (talk) 01:51, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw: You may be right. Feel free to revert it. I just find it annoying to read longer excerpts of text. Any other solutions? —JohnC5 02:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Could you clarify what the issue is with "longer excerpts of text"? Can you highlight any entries where you think there is a problem? — SGconlaw (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw: In the references for *gʷʰen-. —JohnC5 05:20, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, footnote 10 in that entry doesn't look too bad. However, maybe we should make it possible for editors to choose whether to have the cited passage appear as part of the citation (which I suggest should be the default), or to appear in a separate quotation block (perhaps with
|blockquote=1or|blockquote=on). How does that sound? — SGconlaw (talk) 06:54, 24 August 2017 (UTC)- Sounds plausible. Another possibility would be to have a
|passage-long=or|passage-block=parameter or to somehow have the template detect the length of the passage and then indent it above a certain threshold. Up to you. —JohnC5 07:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)- Hmmm. So perhaps (1) have a
|passage_block=parameter to explicitly create a quotation block; and (2) allow the template to automatically place the citation in a quotation block if it exceeds some threshold (though there'd have to be a means for editors to suppress it if they wish). What should the threshold be? I suppose if it was more than two lines – say approximately 150 or 200 characters? — SGconlaw (talk) 07:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)- 200 seems fine. —JohnC5 07:15, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hmmm. So perhaps (1) have a
- Sounds plausible. Another possibility would be to have a
- Actually, footnote 10 in that entry doesn't look too bad. However, maybe we should make it possible for editors to choose whether to have the cited passage appear as part of the citation (which I suggest should be the default), or to appear in a separate quotation block (perhaps with
- @Sgconlaw: In the references for *gʷʰen-. —JohnC5 05:20, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Could you clarify what the issue is with "longer excerpts of text"? Can you highlight any entries where you think there is a problem? — SGconlaw (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
OK, I've added |passage_block= to all the {{cite}} templates. See the documentation at, for example, |cite-book=, and the testcases at "Template:cite-meta/testcases". — SGconlaw (talk) 16:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Broken templates
{{R:hi:McGregor}} and {{R:Platts}} are no longer linking properly. (It shows " word" instead of "word") @Sgconlaw I'm reverting your most recent change for now, please do restore it if we can find out what the problem is. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 21:43, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- @AryamanA: Pretty quick fix; the issue is in Module:italics, which is still in development. It would probably be simpler if you just left the invocation of the module and posted about the problem on the module talk page. — Eru·tuon 22:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Erutuon: Thanks!! I'll be sure to do that next time. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 22:19, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
|translators=
Hey, @Sgconlaw, I could use either a |translators= param or a more generic |contributors= param to be placed were |editor(s)= is, as seen here. --{{victar|talk}} 10:04, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- Personally I just use
|author2=John Doe, transl.. Does that work for you? — SGconlaw (talk) 13:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC)- @Sgconlaw, that's what I'm currently doing essentially in my example above, but, like
|editor(s)=, I want it to be on the other side of the date. --{{victar|talk}}17:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC)- But should it be on the same side as the editors rather than together with the authors? I'd have thought that the translators are more closely allied to the authors since they are rendering the author's text into another language. — SGconlaw (talk) 21:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw, the CMOS cites translators and editors in the same place, after the title in their case:
Brugmann, Karl. Grundriß Der Vergleichenden Grammatik Der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Translated by R. Seymour Conway and W. H. D. Rouse. 1st ed. Vol. II. New York: B. Westermann &, 1891.. --{{victar|talk}}20:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)- @Victar: OK, let me look into this. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Sgconlaw. --
{{victar|talk}}20:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Sgconlaw. --
- @Victar: OK, let me look into this. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw, the CMOS cites translators and editors in the same place, after the title in their case:
- But should it be on the same side as the editors rather than together with the authors? I'd have thought that the translators are more closely allied to the authors since they are rendering the author's text into another language. — SGconlaw (talk) 21:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw, that's what I'm currently doing essentially in my example above, but, like
@Victar: I've added |translator= (or |trans=) and |translators= to the citation templates. Try them out and let me know if there are any issues. — SGconlaw (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Sgconlaw. --
{{victar|talk}}17:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
|pages=
I've always hated having both a |page= and a |pages= parameter. I get around this by using:
|page={{#if:{{#invoke:ugly hacks|match|{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}|}}||{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}}}
|pages={{{pages|{{#if:{{#invoke:ugly hacks|match|{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}|}}|{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}|}}}}}I was wondering if maybe this should be built into this template, i.e. page{{#if:{{#invoke:ugly hacks|match|{{{page|}}}|}}{{{pages|}}}|s|}} @Sgconlaw --{{victar|talk}} 22:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- You’d have to cater for the situation
|pages=10 and 15or|pages=10 & 15too. — SGconlaw (talk) 01:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC)- I'm not sure what jackass is using &, but sure, I'll add it, but and is more problematic programming-wise and should be avoided. --
{{victar|talk}}04:22, 12 February 2019 (UTC)- Well, I don't know for sure if it has been used; I was just thinking of all the permutations. Maybe you can leave out the ampersand for now. — SGconlaw (talk) 14:56, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what jackass is using &, but sure, I'll add it, but and is more problematic programming-wise and should be avoided. --
Why is there no {{cite-video}}, {{cite-song}}, etc.?
@Sgconlaw I'm wondering if you could add these? It seems that there should be parallelism between {{cite-*}} and {{quote-*}}, and I found an example where {{cite-video}} is apparently needed, see the pronunciation section of cdesign proponentsist where {{quote-video}} is currently being abused for this purpose. Benwing2 (talk) 21:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- That would be great, I've been looking for something like this as well, Template talk:quote-video#cite-video – Jberkel 22:00, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Benwing2, Jberkel At the time when I first tidied up the citation and quotation templates, they didn't directly correspond and no one had created those templates. I've now added
{{cite-video}}. Please test it out and see if it works as desired. Will work on{{cite-song}}later. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 
Done: OK, I've also created {{cite-song}}. Please test it out too. — SGconlaw (talk) 06:59, 18 February 2019 (UTC)- Thanks! I've noticed that
{{cite-song}}displays "Please provide the title of the work" when|album=is not present. A lot of songs are only released as singles, so it doesn't make sense to require this. See Special:Diff/51415503/51498953. – Jberkel 09:14, 18 February 2019 (UTC)- Oops. This was fixed for
{{quote-song}}/{{quote-meta/source}}but not yet for{{cite-song}}/{{cite-meta}}. I'll look into it later. — SGconlaw (talk) 10:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC) - Done. @Jberkel: OK,
{{cite-song}}should be working properly now. — SGconlaw (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Oops. This was fixed for
- Thanks! I've noticed that
- @Benwing2, Jberkel At the time when I first tidied up the citation and quotation templates, they didn't directly correspond and no one had created those templates. I've now added
"Please provide the title of the work"
The current template has a bit that says {{maintenance line|Please provide the title of the work}}. This was very confusing to me, coming from Wikipedia's cite web template. Because what it's asking for here is not the title= of the work; it's actually asking for a value for the work= template parameter!
I don't understand the intended difference between title= and work=. (It almost seems like Wiktionary might be misusing title= to mean something more like entry=, and work= is where the work's actual title should go?) But anyway, the error message could be vastly improved by changing it to say
(Please provide a value for the work parameter)
--Quuxplusone (talk) 15:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Erroneous quote signs
If people enter parameters with ''italics'', superfluous quote signs appear, as was the case in sic before I removed them just now. Should be documented, or fixed? H. (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
- As general citation formatting is handled by the quotation template, generally all superfluous formatting in such templates should be removed if spotted, as you have done. — SGconlaw (talk) 11:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
I realize this is Wiktionary and not Wikipedia, but how far across the Foundation projects does w:MOS:STRAIGHT apply regarding typography conformity? Should this template use curly quotation marks in its source coding, or straight quotation marks? — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 05:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Wiktionary:Style_guide#Quotation_marks – Jberkel 17:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the link, Jberkel. I edit Wikipedia, but I'm a bit unfamiliar with Wiktionary navigation. Where would I go to propose such a standardization? — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- @CJDOS: the forum for bringing up policy matters is "Wiktionary:Beer parlour", and then if necessary a vote can be created at "Wiktionary:Votes". However, note that there was a previous proposal for straight quotation marks and apostrophes on policy and guide pages to be converted to curly ones at "Wiktionary:Votes/2020-07/Converting policy and guide pages as for quotes and apostrophes". The proposal failed, as did a counterproposal to convert all curly marks to straight ones. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I don't want to discourage you, but this has been tried before. It's one of the many grey areas around here, and not likely to be resolved soon. – Jberkel 18:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the link, Jberkel. I edit Wikipedia, but I'm a bit unfamiliar with Wiktionary navigation. Where would I go to propose such a standardization? — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you both for your replies, and I agree that I should not jump straight to WT:VOTES. I have submitted my proposal at Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2021/August#Quotation mark standardization. I'm not optimistic that something positive will come of it, but if enough people raise the concern, then it will be viewed as having some importance. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 19:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
|nodate=
@Sgconlaw See {{R:Merriam-Webster Online}}: every use has “(Please provide a date or year)” (|nodate=1). J3133 (talk) 05:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- @J3133: yes, it’s because Victar reverted my recent edits to
{{cite-meta}}pending discussion of the changes. (Please join the discussion at “Wiktionary:Beer parlour.) While that discussion is continuing, I’m going to propose some hopefully non-controversial updates, including readding|nodate=. — SGconlaw (talk) 05:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC) 
Fixed. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
lang ignored
When using the template with |lang=, the cited passage does not have the correct language attribute set in the HTML output (a potential accessiblity issue). – Jberkel 16:14, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Benwing2 can you help? — SGconlaw (talk) 16:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw I think we just need to wrap everything in
{{lang|{{{lang}}}|...}}with appropriate checks to make sure there's a valid language code in|lang=; but this requires moving all the template code to a subtemplate. If this is OK with you I can make the change. Benwing2 (talk) 02:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)- Ahh, never mind, it's only the cited passage you want wrapped. Benwing2 (talk) 02:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw I think we just need to wrap everything in
missing comma after date?
@Sgconlaw Is there a missing comma after the date when {{cite-book}} is used? Example:
- Le Mair, Esther (2011 September 30) Secondary Verbs in Old Irish: A comparative-historical study of patterns of verbal derivation in the Old Irish Glosses, Galway: National University of Ireland, page 216
For me, I see:
- Le Mair, Esther (30 September 2011) Secondary Verbs in Old Irish: A comparative-historical study of patterns of verbal derivation in the Old Irish Glosses, Galway: National University of Ireland, page 216
IMO it would look better with a comma after the right paren. Benwing2 (talk) 01:33, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- BTW the above is an unpublished Ph.D. thesis; what's the right way to cite that? Benwing2 (talk) 01:34, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- You can use
{{cite-book|...|genre=PhD thesis}}if you want to specify that information. 98.170.164.88 01:42, 2 July 2022 (UTC)- I’ve been using
|series=unpublished Ph.D. thesis, but maybe|genre=is better. — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- I’ve been using
- You can use
{{...}} tricks passage character count
See the references at treblanof, grabovim, in which the passage is displayed in a new block because the character count includes the HTML tags printed by {{...}}.
@Benwing2, Svartava, Theknightwho or pretty much everyone who can edit the template, can you at line 512 change len into len_visible? It's a new function that should hopefully fix the problem. Catonif (talk) 11:54, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw? Catonif (talk) 11:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Has been fixed by Fenakhay. Thanks. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Archiveurl and archivedate
- Copied from Module talk:quote.
@Ioaxxere: thanks! Regarding {{cite-meta}}, would it be possible for you to work on an update in a sandbox, for example, a subpage of your user page? — Sgconlaw (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I think I've got the update set up but it would be convenient to be able to preview it on a few real entries to make sure nothing has gone wrong. I'll see if I can get the permissions. Ioaxxere (talk) 17:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Ioaxxere: OK, good luck! — Sgconlaw (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Sgconlaw done. Is there another hidden category filling up with entries now? Ioaxxere (talk) 19:28, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Ioaxxere: (I copied the part of the conversation dealing with
{{cite-meta}}here.) Thanks! However, could you have inadvertently caused|url=to stop working? See "Template talk:cite-book#Url parameter". Also, I notice that archive dates are displaying in the format "2023-02-07" instead of "7 February 2023" – hope you can fix this. - I'm not aware of any other template using "Category:Quotations using archiveurl without archivedate". Maybe the entries currently in the category are there because the cache hasn't been cleared? — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Ioaxxere: (I copied the part of the conversation dealing with
- @Sgconlaw done. Is there another hidden category filling up with entries now? Ioaxxere (talk) 19:28, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Ioaxxere: OK, good luck! — Sgconlaw (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
There seems to be an extra space added with the |quotee parameter:
Wendy Mitchell quoting Lukas Dhont (2018 December 18) “'Girl' director addresses trans controversy, calling for "inclusion without exclusion"”, in Screendaily: “I really feel like when I read an article about Girl and it will say 'cis director Lukas Dhont,' I see that as an offensive thing. If you write about a female director and talk about that she is female just to make a point, I would find that extremely offensive as well.”