Template talk:Citation/sandbox

Testing

Because we may re-merge this to the {{cite journal}}, it would be beneficial to fix the template to work for certain test cases. Because the "Cite XXX" templates are already in good agreement, I would propose a good first step would be to make this template behave like the old {{cite journal}}. Some may disagree on this point. I would hope that any who do would offer suggestions on bringing the other "Cite XXX" templates back into harmony.

Example 1

• {{cite journal}}:

Müller, Erwin W. (1968). "The Atom-Probe Field Ion Microscope". Review of Scientific Instruments. 39 (1): 83–86. doi:10.1063/1.1683116. ISSN 0034-6748. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

• {{citation/Sandbox}}

Müller, Erwin W. (1968), "The Atom-Probe Field Ion Microscope", Review of Scientific Instruments, 39 (1): 83–86, doi:10.1063/1.1683116, ISSN 0034-6748 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

• Remarks
  • The ampersand is not appropriate for records that use the 'coauthors' parameter.
  • The semicolon (as in {{cite journal}}) might be appropriate, but the documentation should be updated to reflect this when the 'author' or 'coauthors' parameters are used to house more than one author.
  • The use of comma delimiters between fields instead of periods delimiters conflicts with the other "Cite XXX" templates.
  • Both templates currently have a "family, given" model for first/last, but the documentation of coauthors for both have an example of using "given family" in coauthors.

--Karnesky (talk) 20:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)