Given the number of places that COinSes are now popping up, wouldn't it make sense to generate them in a templated manner? I see you've updated several {{cite whatever}} templates and included a lot of explanatory text (a Very Good Thing!) which can expand a reference list quite a bit (a Bad Thing unfortunately). Perhaps we would be better served by something in {{ cite encyclopedia}} less like the current:
<!-- This is a COinS tag (http://ocoins.info), which allows automated tools to parse the citation information: --><span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004<!-- -->&rft_val_fmt={{urlencode:info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dc}}<!-- Field descriptions: http://www.openurl.info/registry/docs/mtx/info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dc -->&rft.type=encyclopediaArticle<!-- The nature or genre of the content of the resource. (encyclopediaArticle chosen purely because it is recognized by Zotero.) -->{{#if: {{{first|}}} | &rft.aufirst={{urlencode:{{{first}}}}} }}<!-- First author's given name or names or initials... may contain multiple words and punctuation, i.e. "Fred F", "Fred James" -->{{#if: {{{last|}}} | &rft.aulast={{urlencode:{{{last}}}}} }}<!-- First author's family name. This may be more than one word ... i.e. Smith, Fred James is recorded as "aulast=smith" -->{{#if: {{{author|}}} | &rft.au={{urlencode:{{{author}}}}} }}<!-- This data element contains the full name of a single author, i. e. "Smith, Fred M", "Harry S. Truman". -->{{#if: {{{editor|}}} | &rft.contributor={{urlencode:{{{editor}}}}} }}<!-- An entity responsible for making contributions to the content of the resource. Examples of Contributor include a person, an organization, or a service. -->&rft.title={{urlencode:{{{title|}}}}}<!-- A name given to the resource. -->{{#if: {{{url|}}} | &rft.identifier={{urlencode:{{{url}}}}} }}<!-- URL -->{{#if: {{{format|}}} | &rft.format={{urlencode:{{{format}}}}} }}<!-- The physical or digital manifestation of the resource... may include the media-type or dimensions of the resource. -->{{#if: {{{encyclopedia|}}} | &rft.source={{urlencode:{{{encyclopedia}}}}} }}<!-- A Reference to a resource from which the present resource is derived. -->{{#if: {{{edition|}}} | &rft.edition={{urlencode:{{{edition}}}}} }}<!-- Statement of the edition of the book. This will usually be a phrase, with or without numbers, but may be a single number, e.g. "First edition", "4th ed." -->{{#if: {{{volume|}}} | &rft.volume={{urlencode:{{{volume}}}}} }}<!-- Volume designation usually expressed as a number but could be roman numerals or non-numeric, i.e. "124", or "VI". -->{{#if: {{{publisher|}}} | &rft.publisher={{urlencode:{{{publisher}}}}} }}<!-- An entity responsbile for making the resource available... person, an organization, or a service. -->{{#if: {{{location|}}} | &rft.place={{urlencode:{{{location}}}}} }}<!-- Place of publication. "New York" -->{{#if: {{{pages|}}} | &rft.pages={{urlencode:{{{pages}}}}} }}<!-- Start and end pages for parts (of a book), i.e. "124-147" -->{{#if: {{{date|}}} | &rft.date={{urlencode:{{{date}}}}} | {{#if: {{{year|}}} | &rft.date={{urlencode:{{{year}}}}} }} }}<!-- A date of an event in the lifecycle of the resource... typically the creation or availability of the resource. (ISO 8601) -->{{#if: {{{language|}}} | &rft.language={{urlencode:{{{language}}}}} }}<!-- A language of the intellectual content of the resource. Recommended best practice is to use RFC 3066... in conjunction with ISO639 -->{{#if: {{{doi|}}} | &rft_id=info:doi/{{urlencode:{{{doi}}}}} }}<!-- DOI -->"> </span>
and more like:
{{COinS |rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dc |rft.type=encyclopediaArticle |rft.aufirst={{{first|}}} |rft.aulast={{{last|}}} |rft.au={{{author|}}} |rft.contributor={{{editor|}}} |rft.title={{{title|}}} |rft.identifier={{{url|}}} |rft.format={{{format|}}} |rft.source={{{encyclopedia|}}} |rft.edition={{{edition|}}} |rft.volume={{{volume|}}} |rft.publisher={{{publisher|}}} |rft.place={{{location|}}} |rft.pages={{{pages|}}} |rft.language={{{language|}}} |date={{{date|}}} |year={{{year|}}} |doi={{{doi|}}} }}
where date=, year=, and doi= have their reformulations etc. done inside {{COinS}}, as does all the uuencoding, and anything else that turns out to be necessary later. I'm not so sure about rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dc — from what I've read I think it might be better generated by {{COinS}} than specified by its callers, as it describes the format of the COinS. RossPatterson 20:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I noticed when I stuck a {{ cite news}} in Alfred W. McCoy and then did a import into Zotero and a C-M-c copy into The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, the page= parameter was discarded and the copied one had a | pages = {{{pages}}}. Any idea what's up? -- Gwern (contribs) 02:39 1 May 2007 (GMT)
I'm going to remove this content again. Please note that if you revert it again you will be in violation of the WP:3RR. The content is not appropriate for wikipedia, as I explained in the talk page. You've not added anything to the talk page to explain why this content is not covered by WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE and WP:OR. If you do not intend to participate in discussion you should not participate in edit warring. Please participate in the discussion on the talk page before reverting my edit again. Wibbble 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I saw you had a few disgussions at Template_talk:Audio. I made a few audio samples for Icelandic movie titles. But I think it's a bit ugly how it's put up. See When the Raven Flies. Would you mind giving me a few tips how to make it neat? I would prefere having a link to a javascript player. -- Steinninn 08:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your recent edit to the [ Floppy Disk Drive] page, you have to be very careful in researching the capacity of these FDD's for two reasons. First, IBM discounts to net usable capacity whereas OEM's such as Shugart specify net capacity. There are also formatting differences. The first distinction is alternate (spare) tracks. This is an OS distinction and has nothing to do with the medium, drive or even the controller. The 8" SSSD product physically had 77 tracks, not just 73 as in the Engh quote. The difference is alternate tracks supported in certain IBM environments such as the IBM 3740 and S/34. Only IBM would have so much sparing. If you look at the Shugart 800 spec [1] it gives the capacity with an IBM track format as "2.0 megabits" This is a rounded number, the actual gross user capacity with the IBM track format is 26 sectors/track * 128 user bytes/sector * 77 tracks/disk = 256,256 user bytes/disk or 2,050,048 user bits/disk. Shugart, all the other FDD OEM's and the controller OEMS's also supported other formats, for example, 8 x 512 byte sectors per track for gross user capacity of 315,392 bytes per disk. So what number do you want to put up there:
Personally I prefer the middle one, since that is the way the industry went and represented the product. The other two could be footnotes. BTW, to the best of my knowledge, the capacity of these products was never represent by IBM or the OEM's with binary SI prefixes, so it is a bit inapposite to so list them that way - I think bytes or bits is more appropriate. I'll update the page if you don't object. Tom94022 06:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
DEC and all the rest of the world adopted this format and I suggest this is the one value for the table.
since we all agree that when disk drive and media suppliers use SI prefixes, they do so in their conventional sense
then the column should be in units with or without k and M
Aren't the questions:
Depending upon where you stand and when you look you will get different answers for the same disk drive and medium.
So my answer to the questions is we should make both columns consistent across time but with different but consistent perspectives, that is:
In the case of the 33FD, neither number is published by IBM but can be reverse engineered from the compatible OEM's published numbers. At some point, when I have the time I am going to change the whole table into such a consistent format. I had it that way for the 33FD and am going to change it back, but I thought I would hear what u have to say before I proceed. Tom94022 01:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
That isn't the upload page. CC is explained on the next page. Please remove the text you have added the page is meant to keep text down to a minium. Geni 23:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
link please? >Radiant< 15:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I saw your comment on Lightning Switch. I tried to follow the rules as I understand them in writing the article. As I re-read the article after your comment, I cannot find subjective, qualitative or commericial statements. All of the technology overviews described and linked are from third party, non-commercial, arms-length sources. In short, I did my best to give some objective information on an interesting technology. Ruedetocqueville 15:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:Wikitexschem.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MER-C 05:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. My view was that in this particular case, the link to the disambiguation page tiling was sufficiently a "general meaning of the word, for which there is no relevant article" (in the words of Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links), that it made sense to remove it rather than linking to tessellation or tile. But link to tessellation if you think it's useful for that article, I haven't been entirely consistent in these corner cases. Joseph Myers 15:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!
HagermanBot
00:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Why did you remove commas from the US patent template? — Omegatron 06:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
So anyway, you seem to be the go-to guy for things involving Zotero and Wikipedia. I've just started trying it out (saw an interesting blog post on it, and a few minutes into using it, it caught a messed up citation of mine), but I can't seem to pull references from some articles where I know I heavily used references and templates in and should be able to; for example, Medici bank#References. Investigating, it seems the Harvard references template breaks Zotero because there's no Coin thing? Or is it my installation? If the former, I'd appreciate it if you could do whatever is needed to make it work. -- Gwern (contribs) 04:32 18 April 2007 (GMT)
Exactly. I see that {{ Harvard reference}} is deprecated and replaced with {{ Citation}}, which I was going to add COinS to eventually, but which is more difficult because it can be used for different types of documents, and the COinS needs to know if it's a journal, book, etc. So... Hmm.... — Omegatron 15:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Microformats#COinS_work — Omegatron 16:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Microformats#COinS_work. — Omegatron 06:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I like the integration of Wikipedia and Zotero, but it works only for the english Wikipedia. How can I add COinS in another Wikipedia (es.wikipedia.org)? -- Patora13 Patora13 12:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Omegatron,
I'm just coming to grips with citing in the wikipedia and started using citation templates. {{cite journal}} caught my eye since it includes PMIDs which I consider one of the best ways to quickly track an article online. Names and titles are often not specific enough in a search. PMIDs are also easier to copy/paste.
So, I got started with the template only to note that the PMID field I specified in the in-line citations was then ignored in the generation of the end-of-article reference section??? What's the point of having that field if it is not used? How can I make the PMID show up as a link in the references?
Hope you have some advice for me.
Best,
Moved to Talk:Wireless energy transfer
Just so you know, I've listed this at the 11 May log of templates for deletion. -- badlydrawnjeff talk 19:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm taking this to your talk page rather than the talk page on the article, since I don't want to debate around the issue there, as it were, and this is just mostly for my own curiosity.
Both yourself and 59.144.161.143 obviously feel that the content is appropriate, but neither of you have said why. I've cited various wikipedia policies, such as WP:NOT, WP:OR, and for the newest additions I would refer to WP:EL. In your comment, you said 'The content could be appropriate if worded correctly' - but I don't see how you can reword a guide on fixing a fault to be anything other than userguide content, and then it would still need adequate references from reliable sources. Why do you think that this isn't userguide content, or that WP:NOT et al don't apply?
It's really frustrating to be opposed by people who don't explain their rationale, and it makes it impossible to reach a meaningful compromise.
So I just thought I'd ask here, aside from the discussion on the article talk page, mostly for my own personal knowledge. Thanks. Wibbble 17:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Much better, thanks for your work. There's a link to Differential (disambig page) that doesn't make any sense in context, but it's in a section marked Disputed. Jer ome 19:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
"Are you implying that Sarenne is continuing the disruption from IP accounts? If so, can you list some examples of such edits? — Omegatron 14:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)"; on my talk page.
Re: your comment about talk pages, you're quite right; a longer explanation is on my talk page. -- Metahacker 02:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there Omegatron, I am interested in making some changes to the article on impedance and noticed that you have been an active editor for a long time. I have explained my thoughts on the talk page, including a link to my user subpage where i'm trying out ideas.
The reason why i'm not immediately editing the article is that i'd like to make some wholesale changes, so I feel it's worth getting input from others before going ahead. Feel free to reply here, on the article talk page or on my talk page.
Thanks,
-- DJIndica 00:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Since you are active on MediaWiki talk:Common.css and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) I would appreciate your opinion regarding this suggestion I made at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Template with CSS proposition. Thanks - Shmget 10:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Someone has removed the COinS markup from {{ Citation}}; I'm about to revert, but you may wish to join the discussion.. Andy Mabbett 10:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)