Template talk:Ref book

This template is borrowed from wikipedia:template:cite book, with a slight name change.

Or, to use less:

Description

 * last: Surname of author. Don't wikilink (use authorlink instead).
 * first: First name(s) of author, including title(s) (eg. Firstname Middlename or Firstname M. or Dr. Firstname M., Snr.). Don't wikilink (use authorlink instead).
 * authorlink: Title of Wikipedia article about author. Article should already exist. Must not be wikilinked itself. Do not use this on its own, but along with "author" or "first" and "last".
 * coauthors: Full name of additional author or authors, separated by ", " (eg. Joe Bloggs, John F. Kennedy, H. R. Dent).
 * Whether the surname of the co-authors goes first or last is dependent on the citation style (see the citation style section) preferred.
 * OR: author: Full name of author, preferably surname first.
 * editor: Name of editor/editors. No text is added beyond "in," so labels such as "(ed.)" have to be supplied by the user.
 * This field should only be used when the cited author and the book editor are different. If the whole book is cited, instead of a specific part, use the "author" fields (possibly with extra "(ed.)" instead)
 * others: For uses such as "illustrated by Smith" or "trans. Smith".
 * title: Title of book. This is the only required parameter. Can be wikilinked only to an existing Wikipedia article. Do not use italics.
 * url: URL of an online book. Cannot be used if you wikilinked title.
 * format: Format, e.g. PDF. HTML implied if not specified.
 * accessdate: Full date when url was accessed, in ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format, eg. 2006-02-17. Required when url field is used. Must not be wikilinked.
 * OR: accessyear: Year when item was accessed, and accessmonth: Month when item was accessed. If you also have the day, use accessdate instead. Must not be wikilinked.
 * edition: When the book has more than one edition. eg: "2nd edition".
 * series: When the book is part of a series of publications
 * origdate: Full date of publication of original edition, in ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format, eg. 2004-06-27. Must not be wikilinked.
 * OR: origyear: Year of publication of original edition, and origmonth: Month of publication of original edition. If you also have the day, use date instead. Must not be wikilinked.
 * date: Full date of publication edition being referenced, in ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format, eg. 2006-02-17. Must not be wikilinked.
 * OR: year: Year of publication edition being referenced, and month: Name of the month of publication. If you also have the day, use date instead. Must not be wikilinked.
 * publisher: Publisher should not include corporate designation such as "Ltd" or "Inc".
 * location: Place of publication.
 * language: The language the book is written in, if it is not English.
 * isbn: International Standard Book Number such as 1-111-22222-9.
 * oclc: Online Computer Library Center ID number, such as 3185581
 * pages:  pp. 5–7 : first page and optional last page. This is for listing the pages relevant to the citation, not the total number of pages in the book.
 * chapter: The chapter of the book, written in full. Punctuation other than quotes should be included in the value passed to the parameter, eg. chapter = Meet Dick and Jane. produces "Meet Dick and Jane." ahead of title.
 * chapterurl: URL of an individual chapter of online book. Should be at the same site as url, if any.
 * quote: Relevant quote from the book.
 * ref: use this parameter to make the reference linkable. The variable is placed after the # in a hyperlink (the fragment identifier).

Examples

 * Just a title:




 * Year and title:




 * Basic usage:




 * Basic usage with url:




 * Three authors, title with a piped wikilink, edition




 * Date without day, wikilinked title and publisher, id, pages, location




 * Date of first edition, other language, illustrator




 * Using a DOI



Discussion
I think having to type all this data is stupid, when we have templates that could fix this easily.

I would like to try to revive Template:Cite, with a new purpose: you just write   and this appears: ''' '''.

Well, opinions? After all, the data is always identical, so I think there's no point at copying and pasting it again and again.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. Much better way of using cite. -- 12:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe I could use source instead, and leave a field for any type of text. That would help with W3/W2/W1 references, too (just change page number for "human mission 2" or something like that).--Lon-ami (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)