Template talk:Vcite journal
 | This template (Template:C web) was considered for deletion on 14 January 2010. The result of the discussion was "Keep but rename". |
Convert to CS1-based template?
[edit]@Trappist the monk:, @Jonesey95:, any chance of converting this one (and others in the vcite family) to make use of the CS1 base? It's lacking quite a few features, and its identifier handling is quite poor. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:39, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
- As of this writing, the vcite suite has:
{{vcite book}}: 237 transclusions{{vcite journal}}: 329 transclusions{{vcite news}}: 105 transclusions{{vcite web}}: 208 transclusions
- Hardly enough, I think to warrant the substantial effort that would be required to support them properly as cs1 templates even if there was a hue and cry from the editing populus to do so.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 11:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: But wouldn't it simply just involve invoking the existing {{cite journal}}, and forcing
|name-list-format=vancon? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:24, 25 March 2017 (UTC)- No. This template has a rather large variety of parameters that are not supported by cs1|2:
- @Trappist the monk: But wouldn't it simply just involve invoking the existing {{cite journal}}, and forcing
|author.=|chapter.=|chapteraccessdate=|chapterid=|chapterlanguage=|chapterupdate=|column=|contenttype=|editionphrase=|editionphrase.=|harvid=|home=|home.=|homeaccessdate=|homedate=|homeedition=|homeeditionphrase=|homeeditionphrase.=|homeformat=|homelanguage=|homenotes=|homeupdate=|homeurl=|journal.=|journalformat=|notes=|pagination=|partid=|partp=|parttitle=|parttitle.=|parturl=|physicaldescription=|secondaryauthor=|sectionphrase=|serieseditor=|seriesvolume=|seriesvolumephrase=|size=|title.=|trans_home=|trans_parttitle=|update=|volumepagination=|volumephrase=|volumetitle=|volumetitle.=|work.=|workformat=
- I don't know how many of those are actually used.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:18, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
broken harv link reporting
[edit]Please see the discussion at Module talk:Footnotes § broken harv link reporting where a broken harv-link reporting scheme is proposed.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
vcite paper
[edit]Nomination for deletion of Template:Vcite paper
[edit]
Template:Vcite paper has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
"Template:Vcite paper" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Vcite paper. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 2#Template:Vcite paper until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. User:GKFXtalk 21:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
"Template:Cit paper" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
The redirect Template:Cit paper has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 25 § Template:Cit paper until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 15:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
doi-access=free / last/first support
[edit]@Trappist the monk:, any way we can have the vcite templates support access locks and recognize (amongst others), |doi-access=free? Likewise for authors, these templates should support last/first (and editor-last/editor-first), with a |name-list-style=vanc forced on.
Compare {{cite journal}}
- Liberati, Alessandro; Altman, Douglas G.; Tetzlaff, Jennifer; Mulrow, Cynthia; Gøtzsche, Peter C.; Ioannidis, John P. A.; Clarke, Mike; Devereaux, P. J.; Kleijnen, Jos; Moher, David (2009). "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration". PLOS Medicine. 6 (7): e1000100. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100. PMC 2707010. PMID 19621070.
{{vcite journal}}
- The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. PLOS Medicine. 2009;6(7):e1000100. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 unflagged free DOI (link). PMID 19621070.
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- At Template talk:Vcite journal § Convert to CS1-based template? I listed these
{{vcite ...}}templates and their transclusion counts. As of this writing, the vcite suite has:{{vcite book}}:237121 transclusions{{vcite journal}}:329132 transclusions{{vcite news}}:10553 transclusions{{vcite web}}:20885 transclusions
- There is one other,
{{vcite conference}}which has 3 transclusions, none of which are in article space. - These searches indicate that there are very few articles that use
{{vcite ...}}templates exclusively:{{vcite book}}– 14 articles{{vcite journal}}– 9 articles{{vcite news}}– 11 articles{{vcite web}}– 16 articles
- It would appear that use of the
{{vcite ...}}templates is declining organically. That suggests to me that we ought not expend any effort in adding new features to these templates. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:52, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't realize they were so little used anymore... time to TFD the suite? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Dunno. I expect that there are editors out there who will be vociferous in their objections were you to take these templates to WP:TFD.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't realize they were so little used anymore... time to TFD the suite? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)