Template talk:Cite web
What is this template?
This template is wide use, but there is no documentation or explanation why we have it. The template page just shows a Lua error.
There's a note at FanloreProject:Tumblr archiving that "If you use the cite web template, Phoenix will turn it into a webarchive template with archive link!" But... is that true? Does that only apply to Tumblr links? Template:Webarchive is also indecipherable, is only used on a couple pages, and apparently adds the non-existent category Category:Webarchive template wayback links.
Users seem to be using this template more frequently, and while I don't think that it is intended to be used across Fanlore for all web citations, it might appear that way. And since it's in such wide use, there should probably be a discussion about whether this template reflects the best way to format citations for Fanlore. Like, why is the archive link before the live link? It doesn't look like any of the examples on Help:Formatting Citations and Footnotes. --sparc 01:43, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- There is documentation for this template at Wikipedia:Template:Cite web. I checked and the code is exactly the same as the template used on Wikipedia. The template actually works fine, and it appears to be something in {{documentation}} that is producing the error message.
- I suspect we have editors coming from many different wikis, with diffferent citation rules and their own templates of choice. Some editors may be more familiar with using Cite web than the examples the committee have on the help page. All of this is to explain why it might be so commonly used. Whether it is the best way to format citations, I don't know. We don't really have strict guidelines/rules on formatting citations and there is already a lot of variation in how we cite articles from webpages. --Auntags (talk) 00:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
- The version on Fanlore is not actually exactly the same as Wikipedia's; it's probably an older version (which is one reason we shouldn't rely solely on Wikipedia's documentation). See Module:Citation/CS1 versus Wikipedia:Module:Citation/CS1. For one, Fanlore's Cite web template doesn't support the
|url-status=liveparameter which changes the formatting to emphasize a live link over an archive one. - My main issue is that I have seen editors replace well-formatted citations with this template, often removing other details in the process and (IMO) unnecessarily obfuscating live links. It would be nice to have any local documentation at all to refer to and a clear "this template is optional" note. --sparc 07:38, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
- The version on Fanlore is not actually exactly the same as Wikipedia's; it's probably an older version (which is one reason we shouldn't rely solely on Wikipedia's documentation). See Module:Citation/CS1 versus Wikipedia:Module:Citation/CS1. For one, Fanlore's Cite web template doesn't support the
I've been using Template:Source instead. It is also used on many pages, but doesn't have as many fields so I just tack on other relevant metadata as free text. I like that the author is listed first in the cite web template. --aethel (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Dropping a link to Talk:Furry#Web Citation Formatting for some other perspectives and options. I still think we need to make sure we have documentation for these templates, at least. --sparc 16:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I just synced up the most recent changes from Wikipedia to this template, and will be going back and cleaning up a couple things. One of the primary reasons I wanted to push the rollout of the Cite web template is that it provides a standardized format for citations, and allows automatic parsing/adding/and requesting archival of URLs. Take a look at this example of the tool I use for adding existing archives to templates.
- As for what things should be in {{Cite web}} templates, My thought is anything that we will eventually want/need an archive copy for in case the primary URL dies. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Phoenix (talk) 15:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Add to Templates category
User:Phoenix or someone else who can edit the source, can you add this to Category:Fanlore Templates please? I keep looking for the documentation in there and it's frustrating not to find it. Thanks! -- Quaelegit (talk) 05:39, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
coding issue?
Pages where this template is used have themselves listed as a template. For example, if you go to fanfiction.net's what links here page, fanfiction.net itself is listed as a transclusion link--fanfiction.net is a template used on the page fanfiction.net? If you click to edit the source and scroll down below the edit window to the list of templates used on the page, the page itself is listed as a template on the page.--aethel (talk) 03:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Taking a look at the transclusion issue, it appears that Wikipedia's version also has this, ex: https://fanlore.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Hot_Fuzz - it is possible this is intended behavior. If we left this as-is, do we think it would cause problems? -- FBV (talk) 08:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- In favor of leaving it alone; pages showing up as transcluding themselves via the use of templates do not present an issue. Pinky G Rocket (talk) 15:15, 17 October 2023 (UTC)