WP:Tools edit
Editing edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
nb: there's also:
importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors2.js');
which is a variant that cuts down on some the false positives; it gets confused cuts down on some true positives, so take care. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Some things to know.
- The items in the bibliography have to specify the
ref=harvparameter. The {{citation}} template automatically includes the ref=harv parameter. - The {sfn} template has to correctly specify the author name(s) and the year of the work (all must be spelled correctly; diacritics must match). For multiple authors, all must be placed in the template. Little errors such as
p-11forp=11will cause breakage. The year specified must be the edition cited, not the original year, if that information appears in the citation. - If there are tons of authors or no authors or the publication year is not known or you want something other than author and year, the {{sfnRef}} can be used in the down-below, and {sfn} in the up-above. Examples:
{{sfnRef|Simonelli Rossier et al.|2000}}in the bibliography and{{sfn|Simonelli Rossier et al.|2000}}in the article;{{sfnRef|Posen speech (1943), transcript}}in the bibliography and{{sfn|Posen speech (1943), transcript}}in the article. Using {sfnRef} in the article breaks things. - An unusual situation arises when there's multiple works cited by the same author in the same year. One solution is to place the book name in the {sfnRef template}. But putting it in italics breaks the template (but only in the {sfnRef}; the {sfn} is italicized the usual way), so we have to do "italics the hard way":
{{sfnRef|Shackleton, .27.27South.27.27}}in the down-below, and{{sfn|Shackleton, ''South'' | loc=preface | pp=xii–xv}}in the up-above.There's probably more things you need to know. -- Dianna (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Scholarly papers and article names go in quotation marks, which don't break the templates. @Sitush: another handy tool is the Citation Bot, but be careful; each change has to be reviewed carefully as not all are helpful and some are the opposite of helpful :( -- Dianna (talk) 19:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The WP:REFTOOLBAR gets tripped-up my a lack of quotation marks (as above). Likewise, it is best to do some initial clean up of gross errors before throwing citation bot and various toolserver toys at a page. They're just tools, they require proper understanding of their use. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- I've not seen behaviour such as you describe. Mostly I use the diagnostic features of RefToolbar. I use http://reftag.appspot.com/ some, but not a lot. I mostly just edit and check my work. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 21:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- copied in part from User talk:Br'er Rabbit for reference