User talk:Trappist the monk

Hello! I have a question. Is it not the correct practice to place 'dead' as the url-status if a page only has an archive as a way to check the reference? Red Director (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

It is a practice that serves no purpose. When |archive-url= is present, |url= is presumed to be dead. Setting |url-status=dead does not convey new or overriding information. Examples:

{{cite book |title=Title |url=//example.com |archive-url=//archive.org |archive-date=2026-03-07}}

Title. Archived from the original on 2026-03-07. – without |url-status=, |title= is linked by |archive-url=

{{cite book |title=Title |url=//example.com |archive-url=//archive.org |archive-date=2026-03-07 |url-status=dead}}

Title. Archived from the original on 2026-03-07. – with |url-status=dead, |title= is linked by |archive-url=

Extraneous clutter is extraneous clutter.

On the other hand, when we set |url-status=live, |title= is linked by |url=:

{{cite book |title=Title |url=//example.com |archive-url=//archive.org |archive-date=2026-03-07 |url-status=live}}

Title. Archived from the original on 2026-03-07.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:30, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk. Understood. So, live would prioritize an existing reference? Red Director (talk) 20:40, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Not understood. What do you mean by prioritize an existing reference? |url-status=live is just a switch that selects |url= as the link for |title= instead of the default when |url-status= is empty, omitted, or (if you must) set to dead. |url-status= has meaning only in the presence of |archive-url=.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:50, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk Existing reference is what I used there to describe a live reference that does not need an archive to view the site. So, if an archived url exists in the reference, the archive should appear as the first link in the reference? The url-status flag really has no purpose then for live or dead references in the grand scheme? Forgive me if I sound ignorant. Red Director (talk) 20:55, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

if an archived url exists in the reference, the archive should appear as the first link in the reference? Without |url-status=live, the first link (left-most – Title in my examples) will be linked to the archived snapshot; see the examples above.

The url-status flag really has no purpose then for live or dead references in the grand scheme? Were that true, we would not have invented |url-access= or its predecessors |deadlink= and |dead-link= and we would not be having this discussion. The community have said that it is preferable to link to the live version of the source rather than the archived snapshot of the source mostly for performance reasons; archive.org tends to take longer to render.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. Red Director (talk) 21:17, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I apologize, I know I need to fill in the doc, but things have been really busy. I'm not quite sure what your current tweek is doing, but as long as the test cases keep working. :)Naraht (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

fixing error messaging; the module was giving the wrong message for unrecognized |section= value.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:53, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Doc is filled in. I didn't include the translated values, I'm not sure quite what to do here. I think the module is ready for movement so that I can convert the remaining ones in mainspace.Naraht (talk) 02:45, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

To be blunt: Are you sure? It is difficult to write merely adequate template documentation and really difficult to write good template documentation. Ask yourself this: "If I knew absolutely nothing about how to use {{cite Almanac FS}}, could I use the existing documentation to write an instance of that template using the wikitext editor without resorting to trial-and-error?"

I don't think that you could. Nor could you were you using the visual editor. {{cite Almanac FS}} supports thirteen parameters; only nine are listed in the TemplateData. At minimum, the template requires |section= but that parameter is not listed in the TemplateData so users of the visual editor won't be able to write a working template. The complete list of parameters is at lines 71–97 in the module code.

There is nothing in the documentation as it exists to tell editors what purpose the template serves. There are no template skeletons for wikitext editors to copy pasta into an article. There are no proper descriptions of the supported parameters and the values that they accept (TemplateData doesn't count). There are no usage examples – necessary because some editors go cross-eyed when reading documentation that seems to them to be too much tech-speak.

Documentation is difficult; never let anyone say otherwise.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:47, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Blunt response appreciated. I'll add samples and the other 4 parameters. I thought section was there.Naraht (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Updated, please take another link. I'm copying things from the testcases, but don't know how to use that without the link to the sandbox version. Do you have any similar examples that would be better as examples? Thank You. And as for "Documentation is difficult; never let anyone say otherwise." , that's why I'm a software developer, not a Techwriter. I work with them though. Naraht (talk) 21:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, that didn't work very well did it? I have never trusted tech writers beyond their knowledge of spelling and grammar. Damn useful creatures for doing proofreading but for conjuring useful documentation? meh, not so much.

{{Format ISBN}}, {{Native name}} and {{Who's Who}} might be helpful as examples of what goes where and how styling should be applied.

Using {{test case}} templates for other than their intended purpose seems self-defeating to me – clicking on a Show link that shows nothing isn't a good thing. Write out the examples using <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> tags. For parameter descriptions use {{para}} for the parameter names. Use <code>...</code> tags for the template's keywords.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:31, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

This template is being used in article space. Can one of you please move the module from Sandbox/ to a real name? Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Trappist the monk for all of your help. I will continue to work to improve the doc to the standards of the templates above. Jonesey95, with the changes, is there any problem with expanding the use of it in article space?Naraht (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Finish the documentation first. If you don't do it now, I predict that it will never be done. There is no hurry to employ the template in article space so finish the documentation first.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:33, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Agree. Look at documentation for similar templates. Create a section that lists each parameter and explains what it does and what it is for. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		For both being a master of templates and for helping others on the path.

Naraht (talk) 18:38, 16 March 2026 (UTC)