User talk:Phil Boswell/Archives/2010/November

Template request

Hello Phil, I think you saw this posting already, but can I ask you again - or could you do a better job than me at finding somebody who can do a short, simple template?

Have you seen how this template works for the US Supreme Court cases? 60 U.S. 393 (1857) So an equivalent could be [2008] UKHL 48. Neutral citations go back to 1998 in full, I think, and there are many leading judgments available before then. Do you know how to - or do you know someone who does know how to - do a similar template for English courts? Wikidea 09:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I see you putting some of the bailii templates in - the problem is they're long and cumbersome in code, and they underline the year, which doesn't look so great - compared to what the US one does. Cheers, Wikidea 19:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, {{cite BAILII}} is supposed to produce links like that, because that is how neutral citations work here in the UK, and it's intended to provide the full citation, not just the abbreviated version to which you refer. For one thing, for any equivalent to work in the example you give, "UKHL" would have to link to Judicial functions of the House of Lords: the citation is "neutral" because it refers to the actual Court rather than whichever reporter you happen to pick. I don't know whether you've looked at the code for {{ussc}} but it's fairly complex to say the least. For myself I have to say it does look bizarre having part of the citation unlinked: is that really the proper way to do it? —Phil | Talk 20:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I have just established that {{cite BAILII}} works fine if you omit extraneous parameters: for example, [2008] UKHL 48 gives you a perfectly acceptable link. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Phil, thanks for your answer (and forgive me not replying - I didn't check back) and help - it's really useful. I wonder if it could be even shorter? I'm pretty clueless when it comes to all things coding, sadly. I just work on the principle that if I (and many others) are typing out court=... year=... rather than just {{EWCACiv|1892|1}} or {{UKHL|2008|48}} for instance (this is what'd be the best!) we'd save tonnes of time. Also perhaps I'm just too choosy pedant, but it'd be preferable to have templates that didn't underline the year too (and not just because I think it looks a bit neater when the underline isn't touching the bracket). When we have reports with round brackets - eg (1837) 3 Bing NC 467 - we would probably not want to underline, because with those reports the number already reflects the bound volume. So you can actually exclude the year - and just write Vaughan v Menlove 3 Bing NC 467 (if that makes sense!). :) Wikidea 12:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes Phil, I did on three pages the other day. That's why I wanted a better template. It's really useful to have the embedded link, just as the US template does (most people reading any more than a few of the case pages will know what a case citation is already). Wikidea 23:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)