This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Cite wikisource. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
In my opinion, it would be useful to put the original date of publication as a field in the template. As a link it's not necessary, but as a citation it's customary and provides some information to the reader about the work being cited. I'm thinking of the single-work case, of course, not the "works by [author]" case. --Delirium09:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Suggestions for expansion and organisation
In addition to the above-requested "date" parameter, I'd like to suggest that this template take on more of the features given in {{cite web}}. If this is to be used as a citation template, then this further information is necessary for a reference to be acceptable (think FAC).
New version is live. Soon the other wikisource citation templates can be fed through this one to maintain a uniform format. Note that this version is based on {{citation}} with the following added parameters: plaintitle, plainchapter, wslink, wspage, noicon iconfirst/firsticon, class & wslanguage. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Tracking category
It isn't necessary yet but the following code might be added to enable a tracking category to manage errors:
{{#if:{{{title|}}}{{{chapter|}}}{{{wslink|}}}||[[Category:Pages containing wikisource citation template with no link|{{NAMESPACE}} {{PAGENAME}}]]}}
In the icon usage I have seen, the icon is always at the beginning of the line it applied to rather than in the middle as seems to result with most instances of this template. I see it is possible that there will be multiple wikisource links, and the design is for an icon at each link, but I think multiple icons in one line is a bit much. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Application
For collective works, I think {{cite encyclopedia}} is most of the time the way to go. If the work is complete on Wikisource, then perhaps {{cite wikisource}} can be substituted. Having both really makes a mess out of the template code, and if the work is incomplete, a facility to use Internet links is really necessary. I am thinking in particular of the Wikisource encyclopedias, many of which are very incomplete. Another possibility would be to have a completely new template, Citews ..., which would probably be a boon to Wikisource wonks, but still leave the generalists their primitive citation template, which doesn't have all the Wikisource bells and whistles, but can handle the Internet and Wikisource. For many of the encyclopedias, going to a particular page could be a boon for a long article, but most articles are fairly short. And even for a long one, an electronic search can probably get a reader to the section of interest pretty quickly.
And I will say a word for succinct citations. The main interest for a reader is going to be in getting to the source being used to back up some article text. The author and publication date could also be of immediate interest. But if the work has a Wikipedia article, I think just a link to that can substitute for lists of editors, publishers, and the like. Certainly I think such clutter should be optional. For more obscure publications, without Wikipedia articles, OK it is no longer clutter. But any Wikisource work, if it has been done right, should have all the publication data available for ready inspection. So it is not necessary to cram the extra information in a citation. Citations to the Internet and printed pubs of course are a different story. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Parameters
Parameter issues:
laysource; missing
archiveurl, archivedate; use of these parameters will always generate an error as they require url, which is disabled
dateformat; no longer supported by core
issue/number; will never show since Periodical is not used
As this template is used by about 1500 pages, I would appreciate if someone else confirm the change before I commit it.
Thanks.
Gnosygnu (talk) 05:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Template doesn't link correctly
I used the {{cite wikisource}} template to cite a source, but the link from the ref doesn't take me to the correct page.
Any ideas how I can fix it? I suspect the problem may be related to the fact that there is apparently no "pagelist", but I'm not familiar with how Wiksource works. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:36, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Documentation substed prior to CS1 module update
The "csdoc" Citation Style 1 documentation subtemplates that were being used by this template's documentation will be updated next week to remove all of the descriptions of how non-Lua templates are rendered. This template does not use the CS1 Lua module, so the documentation it transcluded (until a few minutes ago) would have become even more inaccurate than it already was. Because of this, I have substed all of the current documentation subtemplates into this template's documentation page.
In slightly less technical terms, this citation template uses {{citation/core}} to render citations, but other Citation Style 1 citations that used citation/core, like {{cite book}}, have been migrated to use a Lua module. The module has features and changes that have been updated over the past two years and that do not apply, and never have applied, to this template.
Someone may want to check the documentation for this template against its actual function and adjust the documentation accordingly. I believe that it is not accurate. You can visit Help talk:Citation Style 1 or respond here if you have any questions. I will watch this page for a while. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Linking to foreign wikisource
The following creates an incorrect link (en.wikisource.org/wiki/fr:Revue_des_deux_mondes/Essai_sur_le_drame_fantastique_-_Goethe,_Byron,_Mickiewicz) and translated chapter is not shown:
{{cite wikisource|last=Sand|first=George|author-link=George Sand|plaintitle=Revue des deux mondes|volume=20|date=1839-12-01|location=Paris|publisher=Revue des deux mondes|language=French|wslanguage=fr|issn=0035-1962|chapter=Essai sur le drame fantastique - Goethe, Byron, Mickiewicz|trans-chapter=Essay on fantastic drama - Goethe, Byron, Mickiewicz|plainchapter=}}
It looks as if the vb option to control the prescript "This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain:" is no longer working - the prescript is added to all the instances of the template I have looked at today. In many cases this is not appropriate as there is no incorporated text - just a reference or link. (In one case I found the prescript applied twice). I have tried various options: vb = 'no'; vb= no; vb = ; . . . - they make no difference as far as I can see. GreyHead (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
This produces confusing and nonsensical output when (as is very often the case) this is used to link to out-of-copyright academic translations of ancient works:
Sorry, but Bede was not writing in 1903. At this point, I don't see any choice but to WP:IAR and produce sane reader-facing output at the expense of metadata purity, with: {{Cite Wikisource |author1=Bede |author1-link=Bede |first2=Lionel Cecil [transl.] |last2=Jane |wslink=Ecclesiastical History of the English People/Book 1#4 |title=The Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation |at=Book I, Ch. 4 |publisher=J.M. Dent & Co |location=London |date=1903 |noicon=yes}}:
This could be resolved by supporting the |translator1-last=, etc., parameters of {{Cite book}}, and giving the order as: author, translators, date. This would also produce better metadata that the current template, by using separate name parameters instead of a muddled |others=.
It would also much much, much more sense for the "Wikisource" link to be at the end, and given as " – via Wikisource", as with the output of |via= in other templates in this series. Because of this problem, I'm seriously considering dumping this template entirely, in favor of good ol' {{Cite book}} (though it also has the problem of date showing up before not after translators, and thus requires the same "[transl.]" hack. Our Lua just needs to be smart enough to wrap the COinS spans around the values of parameters without including square-bracketed editorial insertions at the end of them. I can't see any other simple solution to this problem, with is frequent and affects multiple parameters in all of these templates.
Anyway, back to bugs in this template: The Lua is also not catching and compensating for the case of |publisher= ending with a ".", resulting in a double ".."; this problem would seem to have been fixed elsewhere, so I'm not sure what the issue is with this template.
Cite book does what I want, with that one tweak: {{Cite book |author1=Bede |author1-link=Bede |first2=Lionel Cecil [transl.] |last2=Jane |url= https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ecclesiastical_History_of_the_English_People/Book_1#4 |title=The Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation |at=Book I, Ch. 4 |publisher=J.M. Dent & Co. |location=London |date=1903 |via=[[Wikisource]]}}
As for the period (full stop) after the publisher, that's because the code is |Publisher = {{#if:{{{publisher|}}}|{{{publisher|}}}. [[Wikisource]]|[[Wikisource]]}}
The publisher variable's contents are presented with a period following them, regardless of the variable's contents. This template is not written in Lua; it is written in simple wikicode.
Moving the "Wikisource" to the end and saying "via Wikisource" instead should be a quick fix if there is consensus. I don't know if this page has many active watchers. Any objections? – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Here's a sandbox example that attempts to move "via Wikisource" to the end of the template:
Using orig. year: Still a bit confusing but I guess it's doable. The sandbox fix is good, though I would capitalize the "Via", since it follows a ".". I didn't realize this wasn't invoking the Lua modules like most of these templates (should have looked first). A benefit to doing so is that it auto-tests input for things like "does this end with .?", and does different things based on the answer. And it doesn't add to the parser call limitations beyond the module invocation, which can be an issue in long articles that are citation-heavy. Anyway, now I'm wondering about implementing specific translator fields. I think the majority of uses of this template I have in mind would use those, and since this isn't presently in Lua I could add those easily. [60 seconds passes.] Nope; the {{Citation/core}} that this uses as the metatemplate doesn't support |translator-last=, etc.; I guess only the Lua citation processor does. Well, rats. Now I'm wondering about converting this to use {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation|CitationClass=book|feed constructed parameters here}}. It seems like the real work is being done to handle special parameters like |wslink=, etc., to build valid URLs and such, and most of that code will be portable. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 05:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Page numbers don't show when using plaintitle
When the plaintitle parameter is set, the page numbers don't show, as demonstrated in the Template:Cite wikisource/doc § Examples section, "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor" (the last one). I would try a fix myself but the code for setting the At parameter is so convoluted that I didn't have the inclination to parse it. Thanks. —howcheng {chat}16:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Could an experienced template editor add a script-title parameter, similar to the one in {{cite book}}? I need this parameter for correctly displaying the title Περί Ποιητικής (Poetics) in Ancient Greek phonology. The difference from the parameter title is that script-title displays without italics.
The current live version of {{cite wikisource}} has problems. Some of these are:
in the default case, the wikisource icon is displayed for every parameter that is interwiki linked to wikisource. This is accomplished by prepending the parameter's assigned value with this image markup: [[File:Wikisource-logo.svg|12px|class=noviewer|alt=Wikisource link to]]. That markup is then included in the citation's COinS metadata – the &rft.btitle= key/value pair in this example:
{{cite wikisource |Sense and Sensibility|Austin, Jane}}
editors must use |chapter= for periodical article titles and |plaintitle= for the periodical's title – |newspaper=, |magazine=, |journal=, etc not directly supported
because {{citation/core}} parameter |Periodical= is not set by {{cite wikisource}}, COinS metadata are always formatted for &rft.genre=book or &rft.genre=bookitem neither of which are correct for periodicals
wikisource is not the publisher so that text does not belong in |publisher= but, instead, belongs in |via=
There may be other issues that I have forgotten or neglected to mention.
There are differences in rendering, most notably in the placement of the icon, placement of the language annotation, and the removal of the wikisource annotation from |publisher= to |via=:
if an existing {{cite wikisource}} template works correctly (I have seen quite a few that don't) then {{cite wikisource/sandbox}} should also work correctly; see testcases
those {{cite wikisource}} templates that use |class= (in contravention of the template doc) to cite periodical sources will need to be rewritten; there are relatively few of those; see this search
various templates that wrap {{cite wikisource}} will have rendering problems:
templates that that employ constructs like this (from {{BLKO}}) will need rework:
the above makes {{cite wikisource}} parameter |year= when {{BLKO}} has |year= or |volume= else it makes |HIDE_PARAMETER0= which cs1|2 rejects as an unrecognized parameter ({{citation/core}} ignores unknown parameters)
templates that have identical code for both |page= and |pages= (like this from {{WsPSM}}) will cause redundant parameter errors:
Let's do this. It will fix a number of problems described in sections above and give this template more flexibility for future use. I'm happy to work on unsupported parameters either before or after migration happens. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Apologies, I failed to notice that opinions were solicited for this change. I am in favour of implementing this change, and do not find the downsides to be prohibitive. Like Jonesey95 I'm willing to help out with manual adjustments where needed if pointed at a worklist. --Xover (talk) 06:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
implementation
I have created {{cite wikisource/interim}} as a steppingstone in the transition between {{citation/core}} and Module:Citation/CS1. First up is to manually convert those {{cite wikisource}} templates that use |class=; there are relatively few of those. This will be followed by conversion of {{cite wikisource}} instances in article- and other-namespaces, except template, to use {{cite wikisource/interim}}; this to be done by awb script. At the end, all that remains should be instances of {{cite wikisource}} used within templates which will need manual conversion and may require some rewriting. All of those done, then {{cite wikisource}} is upgraded to the sandbox version and all instances of {{cite wikisource/interim}} are replaced with {{cite wikisource}} and done. That's the plan anyway (which oft is shown, gang aft agley.
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The WP:NOICONS guideline says that icons should not be used in article prose (as opposed to tables and infoboxes). None of our readers are going to recognize the Wikisource icon anyway, so for most people it will just be a strange blue splotch in the middle of their references. We don't use icons for any other reference sources, so I don't see why we need to use them here. The template output already says "via Wikisource", so the icons don't add any information. Can we please remove them from the template? Kaldari (talk) 15:33, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Icons have been part of this template since the beginning (October 2006) – I know, just because it's always been this way ... When I updated this template, I retained the icons because that is how it was before the update and I saw no reason to change nor was I interested in the squabble that might occur were I to have removed the icons; I did move them around a bit.
I can see that there is a use for them, Wikisource and Wikipedia links are so similarly colored that for me and perhaps others, distinguishing which is an en.wiki internal link isn't easy. So, to avoid astonishing our readers, the icons are handy.
This discussion has caused me to discover a bug in Module:Citation/CS1. These two {{cite wikisource}} templates should render with the Wikisource icons; they don't:
The problem is that the template creates an interwiki link [[s:Sense and Sensibility|Sense and Sensibility]] that the cs1|2 module wraps in italic markup. The module must strip the interwiki markup and create a url to the Wikisource article so that it can apply the icon. The italic (and quote) markup prevents is_wikilink() from recognizing that the interwikilink is an interwikilink. I have patched this in the module sandbox:
Per my comment, I'm marking this request as answered. At the very least, additional consensus is required before such a change should be introduced. –MJL‐Talk‐☖15:58, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Lost apostrophe
<ref>{{cite wikisource |title=Gentleman's Magazine |chapter=Letter from Dr Lettsom |wslink=Gentleman's Magazine/1780/06 |last=Lettsom |first=John Coakley |authorlink=John Coakley Lettsom |date=June 1780 }}</ref>
At Fong Foo Sec, I'm trying to use this template, but the |scan= parameter doesn't seem to be able to hold a link to multiple scan pages for entries that stretch across more than one page. Could this be handled? Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk23:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
