Template talk:Cite

From Bogleheads
Revision as of 02:22, 7 May 2009 by Dan Kohn (talk | contribs) (Response)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Barry and others, do you agree this template is worth adding to every page? --Dan Kohn 12:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

An alternative is to add a Cite at the top of Template:Footer, and then add Footer to every page. That way, we could change out the standard Footer across all article pages from one place. Note that Cite is written to be the article section, while the other templates are created as tables to go at the bottom. So, Footer should then always be the first template transcluded to be able to include both a section and a table footer.

Good idea Dan. I do not know how to yoke the Cite template into the footer template. --Blbarnitz 18:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Note that this Cite template really shines on article pages like 401(k), where the Forum's phpbb software would normally throw up on the use of a parentheses in a URL. However, the MediaWiki software is smart enough to URL encode the parentheses, as you can see here. --Dan Kohn 19:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I could have used this when I wrote CAPM - Capital Asset Pricing Model. I didn't use () for the acronym because phpbb puked on non-alphanumeric chars. No problem to encode myself, but that would limit it's usefulness to about 3 people. FWIW, you can remove the hex as shown. I didn't do an update since the existing code has already been tested on a lot of pages.

<blockquote>Please see [url={{fullurl:{{PAGENAME}}}}]{{PAGENAME}}[/url] on the [url=http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page]Bogleheads Wiki[/url].</blockquote>LadyGeek 00:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I see that Dan tried the above code but reverted back to hex. Looking at the history, was the < nowiki> < /nowiki> code embedded as well? That would break it. Not a big deal. LadyGeek 01:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

You would need to wrap the nowiki inside a noinclude, or something strange like that. But I found the &#91 trick on the Mediawiki site, and it works fine, so I don't think it's worth changing. --Dan Kohn 02:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)