Talk:WMDE Technical Wishes/Sub-referencing/Archive
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Summary?
It's been a couple weeks since the text "A summary will be posted here soon." was added to the page. Is this still going to be posted? --Yair rand (talk) 19:48, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Yair rand: Absolutely. It's taking us longer than originally planned, but it will happen. Sorry for the delay. Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 07:23, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Yair rand: A summary plus the conclusion and next steps can now be found on the project page of the wish. -- Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 09:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
I like this
I suggested something similar during the Esino Lario Wikimania. Not sure where that ended up. Rich Farmbrough 20:12 5 August 2018 (GMT).
- Just a little note: the syntax I proposed for ref tags (because I think it's nicer!) was something like this:
<ref name="Foo" pages="12-24" />
- Rich Farmbrough 12:37 2 March 2019 (GMT).
Whatever is done the sub-reference label should not be called anything that could be confused with a template parameter like page= |pages= |at= |location= because you would have people that expect
Lorem ipsum<ref name="Smith" at="p. 12">Foo, J. (2005) ''Book of Things''</ref>
to generate
- [1] Foo, J. (2005) Book of Things, p. 12
and
Lorem ipsum<ref name="Smith">Foo, J. (2005) ''Book of Things''</ref> Foobar barfoo.<ref name="Smith" at="pp. 12-13"/>
to generate
- [1] Foo, J. (2005) Book of Things
- [1.1] p. 12-13
This is why you need to have <ref name="Foobar" subname="Barfoo"> which emphasizes that these things are labels, rather than parameters.
Headbomb (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- The 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 notation is clumsy. The outcome should be 1, 2, 3 as usual:
- The Sun is pretty big.<ref name="Miller" | page=121>E. Miller, ''The Sun'', (New York: Academic Press, 2005)</ref> In fact, it is very big.<ref name="Miller" | page=123></ref> Don't look directly at the sun!<ref name="Miller" | page=42></ref>
- This should result in:
- E. Miller, The Sun, (New York: Academic Press, 2005), p. 121
- E. Miller, The Sun, (New York: Academic Press, 2005), p. 123
- E. Miller, The Sun, (New York: Academic Press, 2005), p. 42
- --Pp.paul.4 (Diskussion) 01:59, 31. Dez. 2021 (CET)
Conversion
Assuming this is implemented, there is a large legacy of old systems in use - literal duplication of the book cite, various template solutions, etc.. a real treat for bot writers who want to automate conversion. Anything that can be done with conversions in mind would be appreciated (I don't know what that would be, if anything) -- GreenC (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Citation proposal
I use shortened notes linked with {{sfn}} and citation templates, styled Sudirman, (the featured article on the day I joined). The benefits I find using {{sfn}} are no large interruptions in prose when editing, and {{citation}} for the alphabetization of sources. The only detriment is the auxilliary set of references in addition to sources.
| - | <ref></ref> and {{reflist}} | {{sfn}}}, {{reflist}} and {{citation}} |
|---|---|---|
| Prose | Within hours, the Paris prosecutor's office had opened an investigation into the fire, led by the Paris Region Judicial Police.<ref>{{cite news |title=Notre-Dame de Paris : une enquête a été ouverte pour "destruction involontaire par incendie" |url=https://www.laprovence.com/actu/en-direct/5459359/notre-dame-de-paris-une-enquete-a-ete-ouverte-pour-destruction-involontaire-par-incendie.html |accessdate=15 April 2019 |website=La Provence |date=15 April 2019|language=fr }}</ref> The cause of the fire was not immediately known. The investigation most strongly suspected a case of "accidental destruction by fire", but had not ruled anything out, saying it was too early to know the cause of the fire.<ref name="ladepeche">{{cite web |url=https://www.ladepeche.fr/2019/04/15/incendie-a-notre-dame-lorigine-de-lincendie-reste-inconnue,8132982.php |title=Notre-Dame : la piste accidentelle privilégiée, les ouvriers du chantier entendus en pleine nuit |trans-title=Notre-Dame: prioritized accident investigation, construction workers heard in the middle of the night |website=La Depeche |accessdate=16 April 2019 |language=fr}}</ref><ref name="six_questions">{{cite web |url=http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/six-questions-sur-l-incendie-de-notre-dame-de-paris-15-04-2019-8054094.php |title=Six questions sur l’incendie de Notre-Dame de Paris |trans-title=Six questions about the fire of Notre-Dame |website=Le Parisien |accessdate=16 April 2019 |language=fr}}</ref>
==References== {{reflist}} |
Within hours, the Paris prosecutor's office had opened an investigation into the fire, led by the Paris Region Judicial Police.{{sfn|La Provence Staff|2019}} The cause of the fire was not immediately known. The investigation most strongly suspected a case of "accidental destruction by fire", but had not ruled anything out, saying it was too early to know the cause of the fire.{{sfn|La Depeche Staff|2019}}{{sfn|La Pariesen Staff|2019}}
==References== {{reflist}} ;Bibliography
|
| Benefits | One-level Bibliography | Continuous prose Alphabetical, centralized Bibliography |
| Detriments | Interruption in prose Disordered Bibliography |
Two-level Bibliography |
Proposal
A script, loaded during publishing, which scans the page, and matched {{sfn}} with {{citation}}, generating a BACKREF suffix, after the appropriate citation. By using {{sfn}} and {{citation}}, built the way I've described, there will be no two-level Bibliography, saving page space, no large interruption in prose, making it easier to read, and an organized, alphabetized bibliography.
In the case of pages, or locations, they will be added in the suffix, and linked to the selected citation via CITEREF, (example, p. 25, highlighted in blue), after clicking.
*Ricklefs, M.C. (1993). A History of Modern Indonesia Since c.1200 (2nd ed.). London: MacMillan. ISBN 978-0-333-57689-2., ^ a p. 12 b p. 25 c p. 74
Logic
IF {{sfn|Ricklefs|1993}} AND {{citation|last=Ricklefs|date=1993}} THEN: CITEREFRicklefs1993a AND BACKREFRicklefs1993a
AND (a second reference is used)
IF {{sfn|Ricklefs|1993}} AND {{citation|last=Ricklefs|date=1993}} THEN: CITEREFRicklefs1993b AND BACKREFRicklefs1993b
For the prose: [[CITEREFRicklefs1993a|[[1]] ]]
For the Bibliography: [[BACKREFRicklefs1993a|a]]
| Proposal |
|---|
|
| Article |
|---|
|
Regional Community Theater is the debut studio album from the American pop duo Ladybirds. After the breakup of Ley Royal Scam in 2006, Tyler Pursel returned to working with Gym Class Heroes and writing dance-pop music on the side, while Teeter Sperber relocated to Oregon.[2][3] When composing, Pursel originally intended for many vocalists to be featured on the album, however, contacting his former band-mate Sperber to sing one of the tracks ultimately led Pursel to ask Sperber to sing the entirety of Regional Community Theater.[2] Most of the album was arranged while Pursel and Sperber were in different regions of the United States, but by January 2007, they joined at a Creep Records basement studio in West Chester, Pennsylvania to put the final touches on Regional Community Theater.[3] Tyler Pursel is credited as producer.[4] The album was released on 18 September 2007, on Creep Records on compact disc and digital download.[2] Regional Community Theater was reissued by Mint 400 Records digitally on 5 July 2011. While in post-production, Sperber was singing "How can we be the best, yet be failing all the time?" for the title track, which elicited uproarious laughter from Pursel. In a Billboard interview, she explains "I sang the word "best," like a total, unabashed thespian spazz, arms raised to the sky, channeling my very best Bernadette Peters [and] once we composed ourselves I said, "Geez Ty, I am so sorry for getting all Regional Community Theater on your ass" to which he said "It's okay, Teet, as long as that can be the title of our record."[5] Regional Community Theater is an eleven track album of dance-pop, described by Corey Apar of Spin as a "Nintendo version of Candyland, where eight-bit blurps, shiny werps and ticks, and apple-colored synth beats entertain the whole way to Candy Castle."[2] Lyrically, the album focuses on relationships; from friendship to romance.[6] Several rock lead vocalists appear on Regional Community Theater; The Get Up Kids' Matt Pryor sings on "Cooper, Thanks for the Birds" and Max Bemis of Say Anything sings on "Maxim and the Headphone Life."[7] Additionally, Danger O's' Justin Johnson and Fairmont's Neil Sabatino appear on the album. The opener "Slice Our Hands (We Are Blood Sisters)" is constructed with 8-bit music by Pursel. The second song, "Brown and Red Divide," was released as a single in June 2007, and accompanied by a music video.[3][8] A children's chorus, the class of one of the Creep Records owner's daughters, sings the refrain on the love song "Andy Lex."[3] On the title-track "Regional Community Theater," Max Bemis makes his first appearance assisting with vocals.[9] The final song, "You Are The Torro King" is an instrumental track, which features distorted drums, dark synthesizers, vintage electro-accordion and bells.[7] Template:Album ratings Reviews for Regional Community Theater were mixed to positive. Joe DeAndrea of AbsolutePunk gave a favorable review, noting the "superb" list of guest vocalists and calling it "overall a very fun listen."[9] Similarly, in an AllMusic review Jo-Ann Greene applauds the album, saying "..so upbeat is the music, that inevitably the characters have no choice but to make peace." She goes on to explain that Regional Community Theater "work[s] on two levels, enchanting the kids whilst simultaneously capturing the imagination of adults."[6] In a mixed review in The Fader, Meiyee Apple likens Sperber's vocals to Hilary Duff, and calls the album "cute electro-pop[,] if you like being sung to by a baby, and you are an actual baby." Sharing the same sentiment in a PopMatters review, Adam Bunch describes Regional Community Theater as a mostly straightforward album, but admires the moments of variety such as children’s choir (in "Andy Lex") and pitch-shifted vocals.[10] However, Apple acknowledges Ladybirds admission of their "sticky sweet sound," saying that they do a "good job [in the] department of mindless fun."[7] |
| Current |
|---|
|
(this way posted at WP:TPV before this post) - NorthPark1417 (talk) 20:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
- @NorthPark1417: If I understand you correctly your main problem with the
<ref>is the Interruption in prose of the text by having all the information within the wiki code of the paragraph to be sourced? This is actually already fixed since quite some time by the possibility to define them at the bottom:
Within hours, the Paris prosecutor's office had opened an investigation into the fire, led by the Paris Region Judicial Police.<ref name="La Provence Staff-2019"/> The cause of the fire was not immediately known. The investigation most strongly suspected a case of "accidental destruction by fire", but had not ruled anything out, saying it was too early to know the cause of the fire.<ref name="ladepeche"/><ref name="six_questions"/> ==References==
<references>
<ref name="La Provence Staff-2019">{{cite news |title=Notre-Dame de Paris : une enquête a été ouverte pour "destruction involontaire par incendie" |url=https://www.laprovence.com/actu/en-direct/5459359/notre-dame-de-paris-une-enquete-a-ete-ouverte-pour-destruction-involontaire-par-incendie.html |accessdate=15 April 2019 |website=La Provence |date=15 April 2019|language=fr }}</ref>
<ref name="ladepeche">{{cite web |url=https://www.ladepeche.fr/2019/04/15/incendie-a-notre-dame-lorigine-de-lincendie-reste-inconnue,8132982.php |title=Notre-Dame : la piste accidentelle privilégiée, les ouvriers du chantier entendus en pleine nuit |trans-title=Notre-Dame: prioritized accident investigation, construction workers heard in the middle of the night |website=La Depeche |accessdate=16 April 2019 |language=fr}}</ref>
<ref name="six_questions">{{cite web |url=http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/six-questions-sur-l-incendie-de-notre-dame-de-paris-15-04-2019-8054094.php |title=Six questions sur l’incendie de Notre-Dame de Paris |trans-title=Six questions about the fire of Notre-Dame |website=Le Parisien |accessdate=16 April 2019 |language=fr}}</ref>
</references>
- Is this already doing what you want? It would also be possible to embed the refs in Templates to auto-generate the names – that would be up to the communities to do. -- Michael Schönitzer (WMDE) (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Format
For those using the wikitext editor, and ref tags, the format is critical to making this easy to use.
- <ref extends="Pierson">p. 123-163 </ref> is absolutely confusing, not to mention dissimilar to anything else in Wikipedia. (And "extends" is a word that programmers use, not the vast majority of editors)
- <ref name="Foobar" subname="Barfoo"> has been suggested, but there is no reason to add another label ("Barfoo") - that not only forces the editor to define the subname (but just in one place), but also means that subsequent edits need to include a search for which subnames are in use.
- <ref name="Foo" pages="12-24" />, also suggested above, is problematical, as noted by another editor, because sometimes what is being specified is a chapter or part of a book.
Still, the overall approach in the last two examples is a good one - start with a label for the main source, then add something. This has the obvious advantage that if one editor cites <ref name="Foo"/>, it's easy for a subsequent edit/editor to add the additional specification. So, something like this would be good:
- <ref name="Foo" detail="Pages 12-24" />
Or, if that's too much trouble for the parser:
- <ref name="Foo" | detail="Pages 12-24" />
We don't need new technology
We can already do this (or something very similar) at English Wikipedia, see for example en:Spring Vale railway station references 3, 4 and 6, which use en:Template:Harvnb compared to refs 1 and 5 which use en:Template:Cite book. That method was already possible when I joined Wikipedia more than ten years ago. --Redrose64 (talk; at English Wikipedia) 20:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Here is how that might look with the new feature. Personally, I find the organization there easier to follow: it's clear in the article text that all the "1.x" references are to the same source, and in the references list it's easy to find every reference to that source since they're all in one place. Anomie (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
en:template:sfn fulfils the same purpose as well, and can easily be adapted for use with non-book sources. The template has existed since 2009 and started to gain popularity in 2011 or thereabouts. Diannaa (talk) 22:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
It's amazing that time and effort is being invested in this with so little community involvement. ANOTHER half-baked (or maybe 23/4-baked) referencing mechanism that sort of addresses some issue but not a bunch of others -- wow, just what we need! It's certainly better than than complicated and verbose sfn nonsense, but you'd get a better result, without the clutter in the reflist, using the {r} template [1] with the |p= option.
And when you are going to make it possible for us to control the order of items in the reflist? That would be useful. EEng (talk) 00:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- The use of {{r}} with its page option is flatly ugly. --Izno (talk) 01:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- There izno need to be harsh about it. How is blah blah[2]:3 uglier than blah blah [2.3]? (Though, if it were up to me, I'd change the output of {r} to be blah blah[2:3].) EEng (talk) 02:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- See also: Community_Wishlist_Survey_2021/Citations/Configurable_order_of_references_in_references_section --Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:35, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- What exactly is {{R}} supposed to do? Its apparent purpose is merely as a shorthand for display instructions to be nested within an HTML tag, but the template lacks documentation. I found a couple of JavaScripts in the What links here tool on the left. I was actually looking for the Meta-Wiki equivalent of the Wikipedia en:Template:R from shortcut. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR, USA (talk) 05:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Accessibility
First I think this all looks great. I just wanted to point out that 1.2, 2.2, etc, the '.' is hard to read and I have good eyes. 1-2, 2-2, etc might be more accessible. Has any accessibility testing been done or can a consultant be hired to investigate if it would be an issue? Maybe because they are linked it is less of an issue, in which case an accessibility assessment might not be needed. Kees08 (talk) 00:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
- An option I have thought would be to use the middot[13·2][23·1] or a bullet,[22•3][13•1] but the regullar dot may be just fine.[22.1][23.2] But if I had to pick one, I would choose the middot as it makes me think they are two numbers, and not a float or decimal.[13·3][23·4][25·2][35·1] —Arthurfragoso (talk) 10:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Using letters as mentioned by NorthPark1417 before might be even better.
- *Ricklefs, M.C. (1993). A History of Modern Indonesia Since c.1200 (2nd ed.). London: MacMillan. ISBN 978-0-333-57689-2., ^ a p. 12 b p. 25 c p. 74
- —Arthurfragoso (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
implementation date
updates to follow in 2021.
Is it usable yet?--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Marc Lacoste:Thanks for hinting us to the wrong date. I will change that.
- Unfortunately, the project has been delayed. We are working on a new plan and will update with more precise information soon. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you need further information. Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE) (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE): any update on this? Please ping me. Waddie96 (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Waddie96:Unfortunately, we have to delay our work on the project. We will not implement anything in 2020. Further information will be available in early 2021.
- @Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE): This looks really useful. Any news? Chidgk1 (talk) 08:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Even though we also would really like to finish and enable this improvement we currently have no resources to fix the outstanding incompatibly of Visual Editor with this improvement. We hope to get resources for this again, but we currently don't know when this might be. We're sorry about that. Michael Schönitzer (WMDE) (talk) 11:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE): This looks really useful. Any news? Chidgk1 (talk) 08:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Waddie96:Unfortunately, we have to delay our work on the project. We will not implement anything in 2020. Further information will be available in early 2021.
- @Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE): any update on this? Please ping me. Waddie96 (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Question
Doesn't the template "rp" with named long references already solve this problem, sort of? Glades12 (talk) 11:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Glades12: You are right, the template Rp and book referencing serve a similar purpose. The documentation on enwikipedia does even mention Book referencing as a possible improvement.
- Unfortunately, Rp has some known inconveniences such as
- some readers deem the citation style decreases readability
- possibly conflicting citation styles within the same article
- lots of scrolling or clicking required to check the exact source for an information as the page number shows within the text, whereas the reference title is in the foot notes.
- BookReferencing would improve the situation by displaying the book title and the page number directly in the reference preview. At the bottom you would have extra indentation and a separate list of the page numbers. Hope that helps - let me know if you have further questions. Robin Strohmeyer (WMDE) (talk) 20:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- Okay. Sounds good. Glades12 (talk) 13:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- I was just alerted by the system to comment on Book sub-referencing and noticed that the Rp template offers the same functionality already. Rp is a separate template but cooperates with <ref name= something /> citations, as you know. I use rp after each use of a named ref to add additional citations to a video, but to point to different times in the same video, so rp need not be restricted to text annotations only e.g.,<ref name= something />{{rp|minute 10:26}} . Sorry if this is late; I don't follow this specific wiki. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 12:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Inline pop-up with full reference information?
There don't seem to be any inline pop-ups showing the full reference when a citation is hovered at beta.wmflabs. I find that feature most helpful when it comes to checking references. A reader should never need to scroll up and down on a web page to get that piece of information; wikipedia is not a paper book, we can't use bookmarks, and scrolling back and forth is too inefficient and too distracting.
Citations like cit[1.1] also seem unnecessary, because a pop-up window could show the page/chapter/section number,[1] (like here) and when clicked, the exact page number could be highlighted in the list of references. [23] and [23.11] to a reader mean exactly the same (=almost nothing) until full information is shown. The latter form, [23.11], especially when combined with several other citations[23.11][3.6][52.7] will lead to a citation-number-cluttered[114.2][4.1][12.7] appearance of the text. (Hover me [114][4][12]) I also do not expect many readers to have any of the referenced paper books (remember also that page numbers change between editions, making them even less valuable), so all these page numbers and sub-citation numbers only mean something to those that have—most likely no one but a few wiki editors. To summarize: make better use of the web format, stop thinking of wikipedia as a paper book. Ponor (talk) 07:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Facility for quotes, too, please
This looks useful and elegantly-formatted. Feature request? If I am quoting a work, I'd like to be able to cite a different quote for each page reference (or even two quotes from the same page, supporting two different statements in the article text). This would be especially useful for avoiding disputes about verification in controversial content. From suitably-licensed books, reports, and articles, I might make quite long quotes, so ideally a quote should be collapsible.
I hope this is possible to implement; it would make this tool even more useful to me. The "rp" template already does page numbers, but only by duplicating citations can one get multiple quotes from one work. I've spent hours adding and translating quotes to verify disputed content, only to have the quotes removed on grounds that the formatting was ugly (well, it was). HLHJ (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
- This would have been among the use cases for this extension, but now that it has been cancelled unfortunately, I have rewritten the r citation template in the English Wikipedia to feature an annotation system which allows to define various bits of information belonging to the "shortened" local references (like specific page numbers, quotes, commentary, sub-references or even other citations) as part of the local invocation of the reference (so that it can be shown in a tooltip) when hovering over the reference link, but optionally also collect the information and automatically append it at the end of the full citation defined elsewhere. This can become a simple list of annotations, but can also be formatted more fancy over multiple lines, so that the output can be made to look quite similar to what the "Book referencing" extension would have looked like, including grouping of sub-references, see r citation template#R-style shortened references.
- (At present, back- and cross-links within those annotations still have to be set up manually via id=, link-id= and leadin= parameters, which is a bit cumbersome, but I'm working on making this more automatic.)
- I still hope that some fine day we will also see the cancelled "Book referencing" extension to be rolled out, in which case the new R-style annotation system could be either converted to use the Book referencing extension internally or peacefully coexist with it.
- --Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- This r thing looks like a great approximation of book referencing (which, to be clear, I also want -- just saying this for future vote counting purposes). I already use rp a lot, guess this is the next step for now. Artoria2e5 (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
- Not just
|quote=, but also, e.g.,|quote-page=,|section-url=. -- Chatul (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Ongoing talk on En.wiki
Talks about {{r}} are going on here. Est. 2021 (talk) 19:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Cart before the horse (list-defined references)
I see that 2023: Work has been resumed. Current focus: Developing solutions for the VisualEditor.
Given the way that shortened footnotes are commonly used to clean the article's body text, this template will likely result in an increase of list-defined references. The documentation even gives a demonstration of that. As of right now, list-defined references don't fully work in the visual editor. (Try editing en:86-DOS in Visual Editor to see.) Isn't it putting the cart before the horse to introduce a new page number citing system, before Visual Editor can handle the list-defined references? Rjjiii (talk) 01:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Rjjiii thank you for your comment. I will consult with the team and get back to you on this. Best wishes Thereza Mengs (WMDE) (talk) 09:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Rjjiii thank you again for your comment and your patience on our feedback.
- I have a feeling that there may be some misunderstanding here. Perhaps I can clear that up with my response. We are not working on a new or additional template. Instead, we're developing a solution within the Cite extension that will allow you to reference specific pages, chapters, etc. That solution will also work without templates. The problem you were mentioning lies outside the scope of our focus area, which is about reusing references within an article, because it relates to how the visual editor handles templates in general. Nevertheless I hope I could provide some more clarification on this topic. Best wishes Thereza Mengs (WMDE) (talk) 13:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Thereza Mengs (WMDE): Thanks for the detailed response. On English Wikipedia, the help pages have for years said that list-defined references can't be edited in the visual editor. I started a discussion there[2] and did some research. It looks like earlier this year, ESanders (WMF) added the ability to edit references within the reference area to the Visual Editor which is fantastic! You're correct that the references are invisible on the page that I linked earlier because they use the "reflist" template. I have intentionally done a rewrite of the Police Jury article on the English Wikipedia, using list-defined references and no templates, to test out how the visual editor would handle the format.
- Check out this article in the visual editor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_jury Changing and re-using references works fine. The following things don't work:
- Adding a reference: I cannot figure out a way to add a reference into the list-defined references section. If I click there and attempt to add a reference, the Visual Editor will place it somewhere else in the article.
- Deleting a reference: There are two problems. First, I don't seem to be able to delete a list-defined reference. Second, if I delete all usages of the list-defined reference, it just becomes invisible in the Visual Editor but emits a big warning in the article output.
- Hope that helps, Rjjiii (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello @Rjjiii,
- sorry for my late reply, I was on vacation.
- We absolutely understand and recognize your problems. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide or research a solution as the team is currently focused on reusing references within an article. I would suggest that you create a Phabricator ticket and ping ESanders. Since he has already worked on something in this area, you could try to see if he can find a solution to your problem. Anyway, thank you for your detailed message and I hope you will find a solution soon. -- Best regards, Thereza Mengs (WMDE) (talk) 12:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, we are unable to provide or research a solution as the team is currently focused on reusing references within an article. Okay, well that's not going to work in the VisualEditor. You are characterizing this as "my problem", but I disagree. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 02:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Phabricator ticket regarding above issue: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T356471 Rjjiii (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Call for participation: Test and co-create a new feature for reusing references with different details (sub-referencing)
Hello to everyone watching this page. Our team is seeking to look over the shoulders of some Wikipedians who predominantly use Visual Editor, or switch between wikitext and Visual Editor when editing, especially when working with references.
Sessions will take 30–45 minutes and will include testing an early prototype for sub-referencing (= reusing references with different details) with Visual Editor. Compensation is available. If you are interested, please sign up here.
Please note that most likely, we won’t be able to have sessions with everyone who is interested. Our UX designer will try to create a good balance of wiki contributors, e.g., in terms of editing experience, tech experience, editing preferences, gender, disability and more. If you’re a fit, she will reach out to you to schedule an appointment.
-- For the Technical Wishes project, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 11:20, 10 July 2024 (UTC)