Forum:Template:Citation and Template:Link

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Template:Citation and Template:Link

Template:Citation is a uniform citation template that can be used for all sorts of references. It is more general than the Cite XXX templates (only a few of which have been installed on familypedia anyway). Back in May, Phlox installed the version from wikipedia. However, when I've tried to use it, there are problems (which can even be seen on the documentation page for the template): in any part of the citation for which there is an optional url (such as a book title), the link is displayed instead of the the base text (and if there is no url specified, then nothing is displayed at all). I think I've tracked down the problem, but since it appears to be something systemic I'm punting to the site administrators for a solution/decision.

Digging down into Template:Citation/core, I found a use of Template:Link to generate the text+link parts of the citation. Unfortunately, familypedia's Template:Link is completely different from wikipedia's Template:Link. A workaround would be to create a new template (e.g., Template:Link-wp), and edit Template:Citation to use it instead of Template:Link. But this would need to be done for everything imported from wikipedia... which doesn't seem like a sustainable solution in the long term, if we want to routinely take advantage of wikipedia's advances. And of course, the obvious alternative of redefining the local copy of Template:Link might well break all sorts of existing pages.

If there's not a general solution I'm happy to set up the workaround to get Template:Citation working, but thought I'd check first to see if the more savvy users/admins have a better solution. Bruce Kendall 14:55, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Bruce- I took a look at this. See if it doesn't work better now. I tried it on some of my citations where I was using cite book and cite web and picks up fields that I wasn't getting the old ones to display. On our quality article guideline article, I think we should guide users to {{Citation}} rather than the cite book etc family of templates. IMHO no familypedia article should even get a C class rating without proper cites.

On a technical note, actually the problem was the printonly CSS tag- in any case, I have uploaded a current version of the templates. The two chief reasons why WP don't run on wikia wikis is 1)htmltidy bugs on table formating 2)CSS classes being used in the templates that were not copied over from wp:wikimedia:common.css or monobook.css to our common.css or monaco.css.

Not all docs on the modules were transfered- perhaps you could help with anything glaring that i missed. The Wikipedia: links were changed in some cases to Familypedia, and there may be some crucial redlink articles we need from WP. Actually most of the MOS and behavior guidelines should be moved over at some point. If you see docs pages that need moving, by all means transfer them , but add the usedwp template in respect of CC3.0 rules on reuse. ~ Phlox 20:31, November 6, 2009 (UTC)