Last modified: 2014-11-17 10:36:29 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 8167 - support scientific or more generally bibtex/latex citation style
support scientific or more generally bibtex/latex citation style
Status: NEW
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
Cite (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest enhancement with 3 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on: 6272 6312
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-12-05 23:08 UTC by Chris Pickett
Modified: 2014-11-17 10:36 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Chris Pickett 2006-12-05 23:08:51 UTC
I've recently been struggling with Wikipedia to get it to accept a common
scientific style for citing references.  I've come to the conclusion that it's
not actually possible.  This bug addresses several different issues, so I'd like
to have it be a meta or tracking bug.

I'm going to define some terms here to make this discussion more clear. 
"citation sources" are placed in the main body of article source code. 
"formatted citations" appear as numbers in formatted article text where citation
sources are.  "reference sources" provide details such as title, author name,
etc.  "formatted references" appear at the end of an article, or where the
<references/> tag is placed, and contain a nicely formatted presentation of
what's in the reference source.

Here is what's necessary for this bug to be fixed completely:

1) a reference source is identifiable by a unique id.
2) a citation source refers to a unique reference source.
3) multiple citation sources may be placed side by side.
4) side-by-side citation sources are combined into a list in the formatted citation.
5) citation sources never contain a reference source, unless that source is
transcluded from a global template, in which case the citation source simply
looks like {{BIB-unique-id}}.
6) formatted citations may be selectably not superscripted on a per-article basis.
7) reference sources are either maintained in a list at the end of the article,
or are transcludable from a global template, one reference source per template.
8) the sort order of formatted references is selectable.
9) it is not necessary in any way, shape, or form to have level of indirection
between formatted citations and formatted references via a footnotes list.  if
footnotes (or endnotes) appear at all, they are for things that are not in the
formatted references list.

Just for context, these are some (uncompilable) bits of latex/bibtex source that
i'd like to be able to translate:

%% from file article.tex

blah \cite{unique-id-1}.  blah \cite{unique-id-1}\cite{unique-id-2}. blah
\cite{unique-id-1, unique-id-2}. blah \cite{unique-id-1, unique-id-3,
unique-id-4, unique-id-5}.

\bibliography{sources}

%% from file sources.bib:

@inproceedings{unique-id-1,
  author = A
  title = A A
  booktitle = A A A
}

@inproceedings{unique-id-2,
  author = B
  title = B B 
  booktitle = B B B
}

@inproceedings{unique-id-3,
  author = C
  title = C C
  booktitle = C C C
}

@inproceedings{unique-id-4,
  author = D
  title = D D
  booktitle = D D D
}

@inproceedings{unique-id-5,
  author = E
  title = E E
  booktitle = E E E
}

The generated text looks like this:

blah [1].  blah [1][2]. blah [1,2]. blah [1,3-5]}.

References

[1] A "A A" A A A.
[2] B "B B" B B B.
[3] C "C C" C C C.
[4] D "D D" D D D.
[5] E "E E" E E E.

And that's all there is to it.  You can see my current attempts to get this
working at the URL for the bug, it's a scientific article I'm maintaining. 
Please don't play around editing the references on that page unless it's a clear
improved in line with what I've asked for.

Cheers,
Chris
Comment 1 Chris Pickett 2006-12-05 23:23:15 UTC
Sorry, minor corrections: it's `blah [1,3-5].', i.e. no `}'.  Also, I meant
`improvement' instead of `improved'.
Comment 2 Chris Pickett 2006-12-07 01:29:12 UTC
URL is no longer good for this bug, feel free to suggest another one.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links