Wikipedia talk:ProveIt

Normalisation with names

When you press the "normalise everything" button, it changes the parameters last1 and first1 to just last and first. I'm not sure whether this a bug or even if it means anything, but just incase I thought I'd mention it. greyzxq ^talk 19:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Meaningless. |last= is an exact alias of |last1=. There is no benefit to making this change. And, there are other tools (User:Citation bot comes to mind) that change |last= to |last1= – also a meaningless change. Because the change is meaningless, this tool should stop making these changes.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Just thought I'd make sure it wasn't a bug. greyzxq ^talk 20:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Consistency when normalizing

When normalizing references with ProveIt, the |website= parameter is placed after |access-date= when using {{Cite web}}, but then |magazine= is moved to between |url-status= and |archive-url= when using {{Cite magazine}}, and for some reason |newspaper= is incorrectly converted to |work= and moved to between |title= and |url= when using {{Cite news}}. For consistency's sake, please consider having |website=, |magazine=, |newspaper=, |work=, |publisher=, |agency=, and all other aliases be placed after |access-date= on all citation templates. Thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

For the record: |website=, |magazine=, |newspaper=, and |work= along with |journal= are aliases of |periodical=. |agency= and |publisher= are not aliases of each other nor are they aliases of |periodical=.

cs1|2 does not care about the order of parameter placement in the wikitext of a template. For me, I think that |agency= should follow the author name-list in {{cite news}} templates; the periodical aliases should follow the |title= parameter in {{cite journal}}, {{cite magazine}}, {{cite web}} templates; and |publisher= (if present in periodical templates) should follow the periodical parameter or |location= in non-periodical templates. No doubt others think differently so no matter which ordering is chosen, someone will object so one has to wonder if attempting to 'fix' the OP's complaint will be worth the effort.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm referring to web citations. If using {{Cite web}}, ProveIt uses {{Cite web |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |url-status=live |archive-url= |archive-date= |access-date= |website=}}; if using {{Cite news}}, ProveIt uses {{Cite news |last= |first= |date= |title= |work= |url= |url-status=live |access-date= |archive-url= |archive-date=}}; if using {{Cite magazine}}, ProveIt uses {{Cite magazine |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |url-status=live |magazine= |archive-url= |archive-date= |access-date=}}. That is terribly inconsistent. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

In this test edit, the previous revision uses a consistent parameter order. You can see what happens when you click "Normalize references", which I thought was supposed to make all citations consistent. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyone? InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Not loading

When I click the [P] icon, it stops loading at three dots. What's happening? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

• @Kailash29792: Yes, I noticed it yesterday and continuing today. It's not just you. Hope it gets fixed. —GoldRingChip 14:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Having the exact same issue on Safari browser. Thanks! ElleTheBelle 15:07, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Same here. ミラP@Miraclepine 15:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 @Ekpyros @Miraclepine @GoldRingChip Thanks for the report, should be fixed in a few minutes, as soon as the cache clears. Sophivorus (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

{{cite ssrn}} |website= ignored CS1 Error

When using {{cite ssrn}} in ProveIt it shows Name of the website in bold (as 'required') but using it displays |website= ignored. Can |website be removed for {{cite ssrn}}?
pinging @Sophivorus Nobody (talk) 06:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I'm not sure I understand the "ignored" bit, but if you want the "website" parameter to be removed as a required parameter, please edit the template data for Template:Cite ssrn and Proveit will pick it up in a few minutes, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Here's the picture of what i mean.

Nobody (talk) 05:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Sophivorus I think i see the problem. If you look at Template:Cite_ssrn/doc#TemplateData under TemplateData for Cite ssrn it shows that website is not a valid parameter. But in the table that comes next it shows website as status required. Nobody (talk) 05:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk Do you know what needs to be changed in order to fix this? I don't have any experience messing with TemplateData. Nobody (talk) 06:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@1AmNobody24 Hi! Well, it seems to me that the "website" parameter isn't required under all circumstances, so it shouldn't be marked as required and I just unmarked it. Proveit should catch up in a few minutes. Could you confirm is the error persistes then? Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 11:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sophivorus, 'Name of the website' isn't shown in bold anymore, but the CS1 Error still remains if I add the website. Should the status at Template:Cite_ssrn/doc#TemplateData be changed to optional instead of suggested, so it only shows up after hitting 'Show all fields'? Nobody (talk) 11:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

If you look at Template:Cite ssrn § TemplateData you will see a long list of error messages among which is |website= is not a valid parameter. {{cite ssrn}} does not support |website= so that parameter should not appear in the TemplateData. To avoid having my butt chewed (again) because I changed TemplateData, I wrote a Lua script to highlight errors in the TemplateData. The error messaging worked to fix the errors in the TemplateData of the big-four ({{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite web}}) and many others. Some templates still lag behind. The thing to do is to fix the TemplateData but because of the aforementioned butt chewing, I shall not be the editor to make those fixes.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Trappist, I went ahead and did this [1], which I suggested above: Should the status at Template:Cite_ssrn/doc#TemplateData be changed to optional instead of suggested, so it only shows up after hitting 'Show all fields

It works as intended for ProveIt so I would call this

Resolved

Nobody (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Button overlaps v22 toggle

This toggle appears behind the exact same location as the ProveIt toggle. Is there a way for the ProveIt toggle to shift to the left under Vector 2022? Aaron Liu (talk) 22:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

ProveIt can be moved @Aaron Liu, just drag and drop it. Nobody (talk) 05:15, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh wow, thanks! However after opening and closing it it reverts back to its original position. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:37, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu Hi! You can add the following to your common.css to change the position of Proveit permantently:

#proveit {
	right: 100px !important;
}

Kind regards, Sophivorus (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Is there a way to change this so it is at its normal position when the button isn't there i.e. when the viewport is too small? Aaron Liu (talk) 20:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu Not sure what you mean, but perhaps something along the following lines:

@media screen and (max-width:600px) {
	#proveit {
		right: 100px !important;
	}
}

Good luck! Sophivorus (talk) 22:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

After reading some docs, I think what I wanted was min-width, but thank you for the pointer nonetheless! Aaron Liu (talk) 22:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

ProveIt isn't loading templates

I have been having problems using ProveIt and I am not sure why. When I select the [ProveIt] button in the bottom right place on my screen, I get a dialog box to add a reference or bibliography, but it doesn't show the list of citation templates and says [no template].

Every now and again, I will see a [reload] or [load] button above ProveIt. And if so, it sometimes fixes the issue.

At the moment, ProveIt or load function + ProveIt are working about 10% of the time. I tried using the classic ProveIt function, but that's not working at all. What can I do to fix it? Or is there a better option for formatting multiple kinds of citations?

FYI, I am a Mac user using Chrome. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:02, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

It seems to be working 100% fine today. No need to reload the page. Yay!–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:23, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Install not working

I have appended &withJS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.js&withCSS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.css to Wikipedia URLs, and enabled and disabled ProveIt in preferences, but there is no change and appending &withJS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.js&withCSS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.css yields "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name". I have also tried to follow the instructions on the install page. Chamaemelum (talk) 23:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chamaemelum Hmm! Since no one else has reported problems, we'll have to assume it's something about your particular case. What browser are you using? Sophivorus (talk) 22:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sophivorus, thanks for the reply. I'm using Chrome. I tried appending the in Safari and Edge and it didn't work, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debugging&withJS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.js&withCSS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.css or https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turbonilla_pagesi&action=edit&withJS=MediaWiki%3AGadget-ProveIt.js. I also have it loaded in my Preferences under Gadgets. However, when not signed in, the latter but not the former link works on both Chrome and Safari. This makes me think there could be a conflict due to something else I've installed. No need to spend much time trying to figure this out with a single user; I posted here in case others have problem or if there happened to be something obvious that I was missing. Chamaemelum (talk) 23:21, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chamaemelum If the problem is only with the first URL, then the cause may be that it's malformed. The &withJS=MediaWiki:Gadget:ProveIt.js&withCSS=MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt.css must follow some other query string parameter, such as action=edit when editing a page. See Query string#Structure for more. I just edited the documentation to clarify this, since it lent itself to confusion. Kind regards, Sophivorus (talk) 13:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry about that. Interesting that it still doesn't show up automatically when I'm logged in with it installed, though. Chamaemelum (talk) 14:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

The ProveIt logo showed up in the bottom right-hand corner of my screen for the first time, and at the same time, it immediately froze the page and my computer kernel panicked, restarted twice, and froze an additional time. Really weird, but I guess that's just me. I have a standard, new computer and browser. Chamaemelum (talk) 23:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chamaemelum Do you have DYKcheck enabled too? Sophivorus (talk) 11:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

No. It also hasn't happened again. Chamaemelum (talk) 17:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Dates very often invalid

I really like ProveIt, but I very often find the result fails validation in the cite template with

 {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

The ProveIt tool inserts a date like 2009-01, cite flunks it, so I have to manually edit to 2009-01-01.

Can ProveIt just put a valid date in? I always us DOI inputs, so the date is whatever the publisher offered, typically only a month not a day. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I believe that the date that ProveIt gets in the case of DOI load is from the Wikipedia Citoid service and that date is in YYYY-MM-DD format per https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/69241/date-format-mangling-on-import-of-doi

The Template:Citation#Dates and Help:Citation_Style_1#Dates suggest that YYYY-MM-DD would be acceptable.

Therefore the problem seems to be that many sources only provide YYYY-MM which is not acceptable to cite template or the MOS:

• the format expected in the citation style being used (but all-numeric date formats other than yyyy-mm-dd must still be avoided).

So any sources with a monthly publication model will result in a cite template error when added via the DOI feature in ProveIt.

When the Citoid data is moved from the JSON API result to the proveit template data here:

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/gadgets/ProveIt/+/refs/heads/master/proveit.js#542

the date values in YYYY-MM format could be patched up. The simplest patch would be YYYY-MM -> YYYY-MM-01; the best patch would be to convert the MM to a month, Month YYYY. Johnjbarton (talk) 01:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The simplest patch would be YYYY-MM -> YYYY-MM-01. Don't do that. Earlier versions of citoid and/or its predecessors did that but, thankfully, they no longer do. Making up a day-specific date to avoid the cs1|2 error resulting from the MOS restriction is a bad practice that should not be restored.

It was once proposed that citoid use the Library of Congress EDTF format (subsequently made part of ISO 8601-2019) YYYY-MM-XX (T132308) and support for that was provided in Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation. The cs1|2 module auto-translated EDTF dates to Month YYYY. Ultimately, the the proposal was abandoned.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk What do you think Proveit should do? Sophivorus (talk) 13:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Got access to the MediaWiki #time parser? If yes, perhaps fetch the date from it:

{{#time:F Y|YYYY-MM|<local language tag>}} → {{#time:F Y|2001-02|en}} → February 2001

That should return the proper date for most wikipedias which you can then insert in to the cs1|2 template's |date= parameter. You may need to use {{#time:xg Y|YYYY-MM|<local language tag>}} for those languages that distinguish genitive from nominative (whatever that is – grammar in my own language is difficult enough for me so I don't even try to understand grammar in other languages).

The above not being possible, I suppose that you could create some sort of data array that maps language tag and month number to month name for that language.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:28, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Feature request: auto fetch data from web.archive API

As there is an option in the Automatic Reference field and the "Load" button, it would be great if there were something like a "Get latest web.archive data" button on front of the URL field. It could use their API as described at [2] to get the latest archive URL and date, it would be really helpful. :) — Arthurfragoso (talk) 10:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I asked Claude AI to implement the changes, but I still had to do some manual changes. A bit hackish, but it works. Add the following code:

if (inputName === 'url') {
  $button = $('<button>').text('getArchive');
  $div.prepend($button);
  $button.on('click', $input, function(event) {

    $.getJSON('https://archive.org/wayback/available?url=' + encodeURIComponent(event.data.val()))
      .done(function(data) {

        // Check if archived
        if (data.archived_snapshots.closest) {

          // Get closest snapshot
          var snapshot = data.archived_snapshots.closest;
          var curstatus = $('#proveit [name=url-status]');

          // Populate fields
          if(!curstatus.val()) {
            curstatus.val('live');
          }
          $('#proveit [name=archive-url]').val(snapshot.url.replace(/^http:\/\//, "https://"));
          $('#proveit [name=archive-date]').val(snapshot.timestamp.slice(0, 8).replace(/(\d{4})(\d{2})(\d{2})/, '$1-$2-$3'));

        } else {
          alert('URL not archived');
        }

      })
      .fail(function() {
        alert('Error accessing Wayback Machine API');
      });

  });
}

just before the if ( paramData.type === 'date' ) {

— Arthurfragoso (talk) 05:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Arthurfragoso Hi! I just implemented an Archive button based on your code. Unfortunately your code makes several assumptions about the names of parameters and only works for the English Wikipedia, so I had to modify it to make it cross-wiki, which for now means it only shows you the archived URL and you have to copy it to the appropriate field. But it's way better than nothing and at least it works for all wikis. Sophivorus (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

{{Cite map}} not working

When I select {{Cite map}} from ProveIt's template dropdown, I get the message "No template data found" Thanks! -Furicorn (talk) 12:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

@Furicorn That's because Template:Cite map doesn't have any template data defined. Feel free to add some! Sophivorus (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sophivorus, looks like the template data page already exists at Template:Cite map/TemplateData, so I submitted an edit request to get it added to cite map documentation page. -Furicorn (talk) 20:59, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

@Furicorn and Sophivorus: It should work now. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 01:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't use this tool or that abomination that is visual editor. That said, what you did is not making any sense to me.

I presume that this tool works correctly with {{cite book}} which has its TemplateData at Template:Cite book/TemplateData. Similarly, {{cite map}} has a TemplateData subpage at Template:Cite map/TemplateData.

At Template:Cite book § TemplateData there is a wikilink to Template:Cite book/TemplateData. This version of Template:cite map/doc (before your edits) does not have §TemplateData and therefore no wikilink to the TemplateData subpage.

If this tool works for {{cite book}} then, if we apply the same wikilink 'trick', this tool should also work for {{cite map}}. Seems to me that the correct 'fix' here is to make {{cite map}} like {{cite book}}. Someone who uses this tool should make that test and report back.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

ok i did it to match {{cite map}} like {{cite book}} - it had been a while since I'd edited doc pages when I made the edit request and I was a bit rusty. Right now it's still saying "no template data," but iirc it's pretty typical for changes to need time to propagate through the wiki before it can be tested. -Furicorn (talk) 04:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Update: I checked, looks like it works as expected now, I can use ProveIt to easily leave a nice templated citation for a map. -Furicorn (talk) 19:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Template:Cite Instagram

I would like this to be added, the same way {{Cite tweet}} is there. Because copying and pasting the syntax everytime is annoying. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 Done! Sophivorus (talk) 20:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Remove of date disambiguation

In this edit to Cleopatra, the date disambiguation was removed causing no target errors. Is it standard behaviour of ProveIt to remove such disambiguation? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 10:35, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@ActivelyDisinterested I think not. I just tried editing the old version of the article and editing the reference with ProveIt, and the date disambiguation was preserved. Thus, I think its removal was a mistake by the editor, rather than ProveIt. Sophivorus (talk) 13:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, it's a common (and easy) editor mistake. I just want to make sure it wasn't a systematic issue. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 13:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Pipes are not escaped

After auto-loading the citation with this article, the pipe in the title was not escape when the template code was inserted. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Seconding this request, usage of piping characters has become more and more frequent. Greenman (talk) 12:34, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

{{Cite AV media notes}} isn't covered

ProveIt doesn't actually help with this template at all, as no template-specific params have rows. Please fix. 47.188.17.45 (talk) 06:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Consistency for work parameter

I am once again asking for {{Cite magazine}} and {{Cite news}} to place |magazine= and |newspaper= after |access-date=, as {{Cite web}} currently does with |website= and |publisher=. This is the only parameter whose placement ProveIt is inconsistent with when normalizing references. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus: This happens because |magazine= and |newspaper= are listed before |access-date= in the TemplateData for those templates. Switching the order should fix this. — MaterialWorks 15:32, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Is it not possible for ProveIt to use a different order than the templates' TemplateData? InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Not that I know of. — MaterialWorks 19:22, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Will ProveIt allow an editor to publish an edit using it if the only function it is performing is the reordering of template parameters? This would seem to violate WP:COSMETICBOT if so. I've seen it come close: in this diff, it reorders some template parameters while misparameterising two values, doing nothing constructive.

A follow up thread related to the OP here is active at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 91#Consistency in parameter order, should the maintainers wish to engage. Happy Friday, Folly Mox (talk) 11:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox ProveIt allows you to do it, but that doesn't one should. If that's all someone is doing, it's not just COSMETICBOT, but also MEATBOT behaviour and clearly disruptive. Nobody (talk) 12:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I'd gently suggest that disabling the functionality to publish edits that solely reorder parameters be incorporated into future builds. Not all editors using the gadget will be familiar with bot policy, and it seems safer to prevent that behaviour in the software than to course-correct editors through education. Folly Mox (talk) 12:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sophivorus What's your take on this? Nobody (talk) 12:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Detecting if the only changes done are cosmetic, would be disproportionately difficult to code and prone to errors. A simpler solution may be to introduce a config option to disable the "Normalize all" button for the English Wikipedia (since it's the only wiki with this concern so far), or showing a warning with a link to WP:COSMETICBOT or similar when the button is clicked. I lean towards the second because some users may still find the functionality useful and I anticipate that if we disable it, we'll soon have people in this talk page asking about it. Sophivorus (talk) 13:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I would not be opposed to adding a warning/notice, similar to how User:PleaseStand/References segregator has a warning when users attempt to convert an article to LDRs. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Done, see here. Let me know of any issues or ideas for improvement, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 11:25, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:53, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Cache cosmetic notice

Would it be possible to have a "don't show me again" button when using the normalize feature to skip the WP:COSMETIC warning? I imagine most times that button is clicked, the editor is fully aware of the potential issues and policy, and is operating responsibly. Remsense留 17:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Cite Rotten Tomatoes and Cite Metacritic

Please add {{Cite Rotten Tomatoes}} and {{Cite Metacritic}}. Gonnym (talk) 10:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Minor question

Thanks for adding the new "archiving" feature. (The one that puts an "Archive" button in the URL field and searches the Internet Archive for archived revisions). I noticed, however, that the button also appears in the Archive-URL field, which seems a but odd. Was this deliberate? 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cremastra Hi! No, it's not deliberate, but a side effect of the fact that Proveit adds the Archive button to every field of type "url" (as defined by the template data of each citation template). I can't think of a fix that works cross-wiki yet. Sophivorus (talk) 20:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Allow it to be used on Template pages

Perhaps some sort of config option could be added to make it opt-in, but it would be useful to be able to use ProveIt on template pages like Template:2024MERep. Unknown-Tree🌲? (talk) 19:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Unknown-Tree Done, see Special:Diff/1212427273, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Super weird source misidentification (2022)

Anyone know how ProveIt could have gotten this idea? It's taken OCLC 922086108 (A.C. Fox-Davies, A Complete Guide to Heraldry), and mapped it to DOI 10.1016/0006-8993(79)90456-6 (Palacios, Niehoff, Kuhar, "Ontogeny of GABA and benzodiazepine receptors: Effects of Triton X-100, bromide and muscimol"). Aware this error is almost two years old at this point, but thought I'd bring it here just in case. Folly Mox (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Parameter name switches

I'm disappointed to see that this bug I raised in 2022 has not yet been fully resolved. Sdkb ^talk 19:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Another related issue: In the reference

<ref>{{cite news |last1=Parsa |first1=Julia |last2=Harper |first2=Sage |last3=Tambellini-Smith |first3=Unity |last4=Evans |first4=Jaya |title=Sexual Assault Campus Climate: A summary of student demographics |url=https://tsl.news/sexual-assault-campus-climate-a-summary-of-student-demographics/ |url-status=live |access-date=5 February 2024 |language=en |work=[[The Student Life]] |date=2 February 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240204072328/https://tsl.news/sexual-assault-campus-climate-a-summary-of-student-demographics/ |archive-date=February 4, 2024}}</ref>

ProveIt changed |last1= and |first1= to |last= and |first=, despite there being additional authors. Sdkb ^talk 20:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Dark mode style issues

Surprised this hasn't been brought up before, but ProveIt's interface is coming up unreadable for me with the site's appearance selector set to Dark mode; all of the text is white-on-near-white. The main issue seems to be that many of ProveIt's styles don't follow the Recommendations for night mode compatibility on Wikimedia wikis, which say:

Always define color when defining background

When defining a background color, it may be tempting not to define the color if it is the same as the article text color. However, when different themes e.g. night mode are applied, this could have unintended consequences (e.g. white text on a yellow background). It is thus recommended that you always define the two together.

The main ProveIt styles all set a light background-color while leaving color defaulted. FeRDNYC (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

For anyone who needs it, here's my bodge you can stick in your common.css or what have you:

@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark) {
	#proveit, #proveit-body, .proveit-item:nth-child(odd) {
		color: unset!important
		background-color: var(--background-color-base)!important
	}
	#proveit-footer {
		background-color: var(--border-color-muted)!important
	}
	#proveit-header {
		background-color: var(--color-inverted)!important
	}
	#proveit-list .proveit-item:hover {
		background-color: var(--border-color-progressive--hover)!important
	}
	#proveit input, #proveit select, #proveit textarea {
		background-color: var(--background-color-interactive-subtle)!important
	}
}

Remsense ‥ 论 18:00, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Does not properly handle commented-out parameters in cite templates

In Special:Diff/1242637481, this script mangled a reference containing |editor3-first=Deyuan <!--|year=1994 onwards--> by reordering the parameters so |year=1994 onwards--> came before |editor3-first=Deyuan <!--, leaving the reference with an unclosed comment and breaking display of that and all subsequent refs in the article. It also seems to have somehow duplicated some of the other parameters. Anomie⚔ 13:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

And that is why normalizing references should be done carefully and double-checked. Nobody (talk) 05:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Removal of redundant publisher location

Would it be feasible to automate in normalization, per Help:Citation Style 1#Work and publisher, the removal of redundant locations e.g. publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge? Of course, the one hang-up I can immediately imagine is when multiple locations are specified, but that seems easy to consistently check for. Remsense ‥ 论 18:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)