Help talk:Citation Style 1

		if 'etal' == max:lower():gsub("[ '%.]", '') then						-- the :gsub() portion makes 'etal' from a variety of 'et al.' spellings and stylings

Keyword 'etal' is hardcoded in Module:Citation/CS1, making it difficult for i18n. Please transfer it to the keywords table in /configutaiton. Thanks in advance.--Namoroka (talk) 04:50, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Fixed in the sandbox.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

It should be

if 'etal' == cfg.keywords_xlate[max:lower():gsub("[ '%.]", '')] then

or

if utilities.in_array (max:lower():gsub("[ '%.]", ''), keywords_lists.etal) then

and we can add keyword like

local keywords = { ..., etal = {'etal', 'ほか'},

--FlatLanguage (talk) 14:13, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Yep. Fixed:

{{cite book/new |author=EB Green |display-authors=ほか |title=Title}}

EB Green; et al. Title.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:23, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

In many articles, swiping in from the right (on a tablet) will produce a summary list of headings in the article. This Help article produces the right-hand panel when swiped, but there is only one entry in it.
A full listing of headings would be very helpful. ~2026-10237-39 (talk) 03:57, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

In this template, presumably imported from zh.wiki, |year=1998年 should cause the template to emit an error message; it does not:

{{cite book |language=en | publisher = M.E. Sharpe, | title = Liu Shaoqi and the Chinese cultural revolution |author = Lowell Dittmer | year = 1998年 | ISBN = 9781563249525 | ref = en1 }}

Lowell Dittmer (1998年). Liu Shaoqi and the Chinese cultural revolution. M.E. Sharpe,. ISBN 9781563249525.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)

According to google translate, the character 年 means 'year' so that character is not a disambiguation letter but is treated as one by the current module. This happens because in the Scribunto ustring library, the %a character class matches characters from the 'letter' general category. In the standard Lua string library, the %a character class matches ASCII letters. The simple fix for this is to change %a to %l which in the ustring library matches 'lowercase letters' and in the string library matches ASCII lowercase letters. I have tweaked Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation:

Switching the disambiguator character to Cyrillic causes an error message when the character is uppercase:

but not when lowercase:

Rewriting the example templates to use |date= with the same Cyrillic disambiguators also causes an error message when the character is uppercase (as it should):

but not when lowercase:

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:57, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Unrelated but noticed while I was doing the above fix, there were/are some TODO notes in Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation/sandbox. I have dismissed some of them as not doable or not practical. These include the TODOs at

• line 22 (permalink): not doable because the language object contains functions which may not be loaded with mw.loadData()
• lines 730–733 (permalink): I had thought to put nd and n.d. in the keywords table in ~/Configuration but that would not do because we need the patterns not the keywords. I have moved the patterns into the patterns_t table in ~/Date validation lines 444–446 (permalink); see also lines 735–738 (permalink).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

The only allowable value for doi-access is "free" so when doi-access is not free, the practice is to leave the doi-access card out. However, the Citation bot then comes along and adds a bogus |doi-broken-date= tag that generates an erroneous CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of <date> error. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:39, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

This sound alike something that should be reported at User talk:Citation bot. It's had issue with technical support recently, this looks like another bug. There's no reason for it to ever add blank fields. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 19:45, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

card? What is card?

This is about Kitty Oppenheimer and doi:10.1163/2468-1733_shafr_sim140060087? That doi appears to me to be functional and links to this page at Brill which clearly shows that the cited source is behind a paywall so |doi-access=free is not appropriate. Setting |doi-access= to any other value (were other values permitted) would not change effects of |doi-broken-date= were that parameter in use in the template.

I do not know why Citation bot thinks or thought that the doi is/was inactive but, as mentioned above, the correct venue for Citation bot issues is at User talk:Citation bot.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Moved discussion to User talk:Citation bot, with misgivings. "Card" is an old-fashioned term for a parameter. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

May I have help from someone with experience in this maintenance category stack to look at Category:CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of 2026? I came across it because it was uncategorized. I dropped it into the parent category but I notice that the categories it contains are all by month, not by year. Was this created in error? Bsherr (talk) 01:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Probably. Ask OboeBlanket who added |doi-broken-date=2026 at this edit. As it is with almost all 'dated' maintenance templates, cs1|2 expects the format |doi-broken-date=<Month> <year>. But, doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.871041 does not appear to be broken so we might also wonder why the |doi-broken-date= parameter was added in the first place... Perhaps |doi-access=free was the intended parameter?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

There, I removed the incorrect parameter. OboeBlanket (talk) 12:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

A thought that's been floating around in my head for a few days -- there are a great deal of journalists who are not "wikinotable", but are cited on hundreds of articles across Wikipedia. It would be useful to have a way to search for articles by cited author, aside from the old-fashioned method of searching their name in quotes. I'm wondering if we can add something like a wikidata-author parameter to facilitate this citation tracking. I'm having difficulty envisioning what exactly this would look like, but hopefully I'm getting the idea across. What do we think about this?

As an aside, we should also change ISSN links in citations from WorldCat to the ISSN portal. See Template talk:ISSN for more discussion on that. Never thought to post here until now. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I follow what you are trying to suggest. I did a simple search for The New York Times and from the results picked the first listed article which happened to be BTS. Then I did a Ctrl+F search for The New York Times on that page which took me to this reference (permalink). From that ref, I copied Qin, Amy and pasted that into the search box which took me to these results.

Then I did this search at wikidata. The Amy Qin cited in the BTS article is likely to be this Amy Qin (Q123406389).

Repeating the above for the other NYT reference in BTS led me to John Yoon (Q59749937) and John K Yoon (Q104471283); neither of whom look to be NYT authors...

I presume that you want to search en.wiki for the cited author's wikidata qid. We don't need to invent a new parameter for that. You could (in Amy Qin's case) add |author-link=:d:Q123406389 which will link her name to her wikidata entry. You would of course have to find all instances of her name in cs1|2 templates and make the same change to each template so that you could search for Q123406389. Seems like a lot of work for very little gain. What am I missing or what have you not clearly explained?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:38, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm having a hard time articulating this. Essentially what I want is a method of viewing all the articles on which a particular author is cited, without doing a regular search. The idea is that by adding a wikidata-author parameter that links citations to a specific author, it would be possible to generate lists of connected articles. There doesn't have to be a visible link to the Wikidata item in the citations. I might have to think this through some more... I know what I'm looking for, I just don't know how to get there. MediaKyle (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

PMID 41914263 is valid and used on Barettin. Could we update the limit? Thanks a million! Snowman304|talk 01:56, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

A discussion recommended that the YMD date format be preferred for the Cite web template has been proposed at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Updating Cite web documentation to reflect ymd as slightly preferred format for single full dates. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

This and supporting edits should be reverted. 11.xxxx is an invalid doi, and should never be supported. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:39, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

The error that should be output is err_bad_doi, not Script Error. If you think that the error should not be avoidable even with Accept-this-as-written markup, search for if registrant then and modify that part. Pages using Accept-this-as-written markup are tracked by Category:CS1 maint: ignored DOI errors and Category:Ignored DOI errors, so I believe the current setup is sufficient.--FlatLanguage (talk) 01:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

None of those start with 11.xxxx/... Again, this is not something that should be supported. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:58, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

What does "support" means? Error of Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 568: attempt to index local 'suffix' (a nil value) have been happend after Special:Diff/1333551121. Can all editors understand this error message? --FlatLanguage (talk) 04:09, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I have reworked the |doi= error detection/messaging in the sandbox:

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

If we enter an ArchiveURL with for instance 20200101000001 and an ArchiveDate with 2020-01-02, we'll get the error "timestamp mismatch; 2020-01-01 suggested". So the correct ArchiveDate is already known and the module checks that we enter it correctly.

This feels like passing a useless editing exam. Couldn't we just use the parsed ArchiveDate and make that field optional? Forcing the user to manually enter the ArchiveDate seems unnecessary at this point. The RedBurn (ϕ) 09:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Although the archive date is represent in the URL from the Wayback machine I don't believe it's true of all archival services. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:32, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

That makes sense. Though since the archive-date field isn't required, the ArchiveDate could be automatically extracted from the ArchiveURL when it's archive.org. The RedBurn (ϕ) 15:02, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

See . Should be added to the list of bad titles. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:41, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I’ve looked through the page but it provides almost no insight on actually writing a [superscript number] style citation to a web source. It’s unclear whether it’s <ref> or {{cite web}}: Empty citation (help) or both, or what the relation or reasons for each of these is. I tried several variations based on help page examples and all of them caused egregious errors. RandomEditor6772314 (talk) 00:57, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Does WP:Referencing for beginners and the pages linked from there answer your needs?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

See also Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates. The example uses {{cite news}}, but the other citation templates work similarly. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:26, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

The video at WP:INTREF3 in WP:Referencing for beginners gives a simple explanation of how to quickly generate references. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm asking because I've found two or three instances in dust devil, e.g. this and this one.-- Carnby (talk) 15:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

{{cite web}} should work fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)