Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:ProveIt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dates very often invalid

[edit]

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)[reply]

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:
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@Trappist the monk What do you think Proveit should do? Sophivorus (talk) 13:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
 Done (using Intl.DateTimeFormat rather than #time to avoid unnecessary API requests). Can be tested in the development version (see my common.js) and will be deployed in a few days. Sophivorus (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cache cosmetic notice

[edit]

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)[reply]

@Remsense  Done Adding a checkbox was unexpectedly difficult, so instead I made it so that a cookie is set and the WP:COSMETIC warning is shown only once without the need of checking a checkbox. Can be tested in the development version (see my common.js) and will be deployed in a few days. Sophivorus (talk) 15:52, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cite Rotten Tomatoes and Cite Metacritic

[edit]

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

@Gonnym  Done (diff), sorry for the delay. Sophivorus (talk) 14:32, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minor question

[edit]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]
 Done Proveit now doesn't show the "Archive" button if the URL contains "archive.org" in it. Sophivorus (talk) 16:33, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow it to be used on Template pages

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

Super weird source misidentification (2022)

[edit]

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)[reply]

Parameter name switches

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
 Done Proveit no longer changes parameter names. Sophivorus (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dark mode style issues

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
 Done Proveit now uses Codex and is dark-mode compatible. Sophivorus (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, looks pretty snazzy, thanks! Remsense 🌈 论 16:43, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does not properly handle commented-out parameters in cite templates

[edit]

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)[reply]

And that is why normalizing references should be done carefully and double-checked. Nobody (talk) 05:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Commented-out parameters now show as part of the previous parameter, rather than broken and half-parsed. If the commented-out parameter is the first parameter, then it will be considered part of the template name so the template will not be recognized and will show as raw wikitext. However, such edge cases should be very rare. Sophivorus (talk) 16:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of redundant publisher location

[edit]

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)[reply]

Bug of Periodic

[edit]

Hello, I'm a fan user of ProveIt. Thanks to maintain it. I come here to say that there is a bug : in the article option, the periodic is no longer mentioned; instead, it is indicated "CrossRef". Is it possible to fix it ? Thanks in advance. Abalg (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Abalg Hi! I'm afraid I can't understand what you mean. If you can explain a bit more clearly, I'd be happy to help. Sophivorus (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sophivorus. For example :
{{Article |langue=en |prénom1=Thomas |nom1=Læssøe |prénom2=Brian |nom2=Spooner |titre=The uses of ‘Gasteromycetes’ |périodique=CrossRef |volume=8 |numéro=4 |pages=154–159 |date=1994-11 |doi=10.1016/S0269-915X(09)80179-1 |lire en ligne=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0269915X09801791 |consulté le=2025-02-27}}
CrossRef is used instead of the real periodic/journal --> Mycologist.
By the way, I use ProveIt in French. --Abalg (talk) 21:04, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abalg Hi again! I went to frwiki, copied your wikitext, opened the reference with Proveit, looked around, previewed the changes, normalized the reference, etc. but I can't find anything wrong. I also tried generating the reference automatically out of the URL and the periodic loaded correctly (apparently it's "ScienceDirect" rather than "Mycologist"). What exactly do you do, what do you expect and what happens instead? Also, if you can share a screenshot pointing to the problem that will probably help a lot. Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sophivorus. No. ScienceDirect is not the correct periodic, it's the internet site of the editor Elsevier. Mycologist is the correct one, I'm 100 % sure. As I said, in the week I've been using ProveIt with dozens of DOIs, the problem is the same: the article option comes every times with the wrong periodical answer ‘CrossRef’. In your test, did you really use the ‘article’ option ? Because the option 'Lien web' will give you the internet website in answer, not the periodic. Here an other example with the issue :
{{Article |langue=en |prénom1=Charly |nom1=Géron |prénom2=Ross N. |nom2=Cuthbert |prénom3=Hoël |nom3=Hotte |prénom4=David |nom4=Renault |titre=Density-dependent predatory impacts of an invasive beetle across a subantarctic archipelago |périodique=CrossRef |volume=13 |numéro=1 |date=2023-09-02 |issn=2045-2322 |doi=10.1038/s41598-023-41089-2 |lire en ligne=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-41089-2 |consulté le=2025-03-01}}
As you can see, Crossref is used instead of Scientific Reports. --Abalg (talk) 15:29, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the issue is still there. I'm afraid it's a major source of error in our Wikipedia articles, as few contributors will check whether ProveIt gives a correct answer or not. --Abalg (talk) 10:33, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you load it using the doi instead of the url it works correctly. Nobody (talk) 13:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1AmNobody24, I had never used the url, always the doi. The issue is still there this morning with 10.47446/OSMIA13.1 . --Abalg (talk) 13:20, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I load the reference with that doi I get <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ropars |first=Lise |last2=Aubert |first2=Matthieu |last3=Genoud |first3=David |last4=Le Divelec |first4=Romain |last5=Dufrêne |first5=Éric |last6=Cornuel-Willermoz |first6=Alexandre |last7=Dorchin |first7=Achik |last8=Flacher |first8=Floriane |last9=Flaminio |first9=Simone |last10=Gadoum |first10=Serge |last11=Ghisbain |first11=Guillaume |last12=Kasparek |first12=Max |last13=Kuhlmann |first13=Michael |last14=Leclercq |first14=Vincent |last15=Le Féon |first15=Violette |date=2025-02-12 |title=Mise à jour de la liste des abeilles de France métropolitaine (Hymenoptera : Apocrita : Apoidea) |url=https://www.osmia-journal-hymenoptera.com/osmia-13-1.html |journal=Osmia |volume=13 |pages=1–48 |doi=10.47446/OSMIA13.1 |issn=2727-3806}}</ref> which looks good to me. Nobody (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1AmNobody24. Yes, your result is good. Mine is not: {{Article |prénom1=Lise |nom1=Ropars |prénom2=Matthieu |nom2=Aubert |prénom3=David |nom3=Genoud |prénom4=Romain |nom4=Le Divelec |titre=Mise à jour de la liste des abeilles de France métropolitaine (Hymenoptera : Apocrita : Apoidea) |périodique=CrossRef |volume=13 |pages=1–48 |date=2025-02-12 |issn=2727-3806 |doi=10.47446/OSMIA13.1 |lire en ligne=https://www.osmia-journal-hymenoptera.com/osmia-13-1.html |consulté le=2025-03-05}}. --Abalg (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abalg @1AmNobody24 Looking into it, will be back soon with updates or a fix. Sophivorus (talk) 13:48, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sophivorus. --Abalg (talk) 13:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abalg @1AmNobody24 Hi again! I was able to track down the cause to a questionable mapping of Citoid parameters to template parameters. See what I did here and please add the /doc page to your watchlist in case someone reverts or comments. I just tested the change and it seems to work, but do test it out too and let me know! Sophivorus (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's worked!!! Issue fixed! Thank you a lot Sophivorus. Have a great day. --Abalg (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Sophivorus,
The libraryCatalog field is used for Le Monde in Zotero, as seen in the following script: https://github.com/zotero/translators/blob/master/Le%20Monde.js#L142 . Since Le Monde is the most frequently cited newspaper on the French Wikipedia, removing this mapping could create more problems than it resolves.
Is there an issue with the Zotero translator ? Escargot bleu (talk) 11:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since publicationTitle is still mapped, I don't think it creates a problem for Le Monde. Nobody (talk) 11:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does, the Zotero translator always outputs the publication title in the libraryCatalog field and not in publicationTitle. For example, you can try generating a citation to https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2025/03/14/au-tchad-marine-le-pen-entend-tirer-profit-des-revers-d-emmanuel-macron-en-afrique_6580933_3212.html using the Visual Editor in frwiki. Escargot bleu (talk) 12:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like enwiki has the same issue. I assumed it would use publicationTitle as a fallback if libraryCatalog isn't used. Weird. Nobody (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I restored the mapping from libraryCatalog to périodique and then I tweaked Proveit (diff) so that mappings don't override values set by previous mappings (or manually by users). This makes it work in both cases, hopefully without creating new issues. Lets keep an eye out though! Sophivorus (talk) 14:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
I'm still wondering whether the Zotero translator for Le Monde is populating the fields correctly or if it should be requested that it be modified to put the name of the newspaper in publicationTitle instead of libraryCatalog. Escargot bleu (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rapid grant to improve the gadget

[edit]

Hi! I'm thinking on requesting a rapid grant to improve the Proveit gadget. In the past I requested two other grants (first, second) which were a great success. Sometimes I do updates and fixes as a volunteer, but reality is that big updates and improvements require more time that I'm willing to put in for free. Thus, I'd like to request a third grant to do several things, some of which you've requested in this talk page, others are listed at the Phabricator project and others I list below:

  • Add support for the "extends" parameter
  • Add a button to "convert" a reference that is just a URL, into a full reference (similar to the button in the visual editor)
  • Make the gadget compatible with dark-mode
  • Update the code to more current standards (for example, get rid of deprecated libraries like OOUI and jQuery UI)

Would you support such a grant? What other features and bugs would you like me to tackle? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 14:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Would the convert button function the same as the load one? Given that this would make it a bit more automated, would you be open to create something like WP:AWBRULES for ProveIt?
  • Could you consider adding a button that checks if the input in the website, journal, publisher, magazine, etc. parameter exists on Wikipedia for easier wikilinking?
  • Could you investigate if it's possible for ProveIt to stay open when reloading the realtimepreview?
  • Could you investigate if it's possible for ProveIt to easily respect/set date formatting (dmy/mdy)? (Edit: Might be the same idea as T248050)
Either way you have my support. Nobody (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support and the ideas. Yes I'll do my best to implement them! Sophivorus (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@1AmNobody24 At your request, here's a more complete list of tasks I'd be tackling:
@Mattflaschen @Asav @JFG @OrenBochman @Arg342 @Daniel Mietchen @GenQuest @DXLB Muzikant @TheDJ @MarcoAurelio @Jayprakash12345 @Ivanhercaz @Ammarpad @Iniquity @Winged Blades of Godric @Kpjas @Furicorn @Aldnonymous @Bluerasberry @LuisCG11 @Guarapiranga I'm pinging you because you supported my previous Proveit grants, so I thought you may be interested in this one too. Feel free to add requests or comments! Sophivorus (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
checkY Support You are making big promises to a popular tool and not requesting much money. You have a list of specific deliverables which people can check. You are pointing to phabricator tickets for issues which people have requested that you resolve. Yes of course support, ping me anytime for this. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:15, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Support Asav | Talk 15:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great! I like the idea of adding {{sfn}} support, but I'm not excatly sure about T342228. Nobody (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I support :) Iniquity (talk) 17:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Support Certainly a useful tool. Thanks and let us know if we can help. GenQuest "scribble" 01:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry, Asav, Nobody, Iniquity GenQuest Hi again! Thanks for the support. The proposal is now under review at meta:Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/Enhance the ProveIt gadget, part 3 (ID: 23036940). Feel free to endorse it and/or leave feedback there. Cheers!

Good news! The grant has been approved. I'll start work on June 27. Until then, feel free to let me know of any further ideas or requests, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 12:16, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there somewhere we'll be able to follow your progress? Phabricator, Gerrit, etc.? Nobody (talk) 12:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@1AmNobody24 I think probably Phabricator will be the best place. Sophivorus (talk) 13:10, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grant started

[edit]

Hi guys, just wanted to let you know that I already started with the grant. So far I've been updating the code to more current standards (see User:Sophivorus/proveit.js) and doing small fixes and improvements here and there. I'm aiming to deploy a first set of changes by the end of next week, and will write about it here. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 17:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Here's a list of changes so far:
  • Move interface messages from Gerrit to Commons:Data:Gadget-ProveIt.tab (this fixes #ProveIt is not working and prevents future shenanigans with Gerrit)
  • Editing or normalizing references no longer changes template names or parameter names, only spacing (this fixes #Parameter name switches which has been a recurring request)
  • Normalizing all references is much faster now
  • Fix bug where updating the name of a reference wouldn't update all its reuses correctly
  • Don't show the button to reuse a reference that hasn't been inserted yet, and other UI improvements
  • Technical debt:
    • Update code to ES7: use async/await, const/let, String.includes/Array.includes, arrow functions, etc
    • Use mw:WikitextParser.js
    • Remove dependency on deprecated mw:OOUI
I haven't deployed the changes yet because of some minor issues and because I think there's no rush. You can test the new version by disabling Proveit in your preferences and then copying the code at my common.js to yours. Tomorrow I'm leaving for four weeks due to a big family event. I'll resume work as soon as I return and intend to finish on time. Kind regards, Sophivorus (talk) 16:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grant closing

[edit]

Hi again! I'm getting to the end of the rapid grant I started two months ago. Here is a report of changes:

Task Request Status Comment
Add support for the "extends" attribute T242109  Done While Proveit already supports the "extends" attribute, the new version of Extension:Cite that introduces the "extends" attribute hasn't been deployed yet.
Add button to "convert" a reference that is just a URL into a full reference, similar to the button in the visual editor T280930  Done When the content of a reference is just a URL, it will be auto-loaded into the "Automatic citation" field so that the user only needs to click the "Generate" button to create the citation template.
Detect the appropriate citation template when using Citoid  Done Before, the citation template had to be manually selected, now it is guessed automatically.
Make the gadget compatible with dark-mode Talk  Done
Fix issue that prevented Proveit from loading in old browsers Talk  Done See T394916 for details.
Add something like WP:AWBRULES to Wikipedia:ProveIt Talk  Done See Wikipedia:ProveIt#Rules of use
Add a Link button (similar to the current "Archive" and "Today" buttons) to check if an input (like website, journal, publisher, magazine, etc) exists on Wikipedia and automatically wikilink it Talk  Done Fields of type "page" now search the wiki for existing pages.
Make Proveit remain open when reloading the realtime preview. Talk  Done
When editing a section, allow to cite references from another section T148214  Not done Sorry, this was too much of a rewrite for the time and energy I had left.
Add buttons to browse to the next and previous reference T400699  Done
Improve Proveit's config to allow control over the format of specific date fields, as well as which fields show the Archive, Today and Link buttons T248050  Done The preferred date format can now be set from the Proveit config, see mw:ProveIt#Installation
Maybe add support for referencing templates that don't require <ref> tags, such as Template:Sfn and Template:R T358450  Done
Replace the floating [P] button for a more standard button in the toolbar T241283  Not done After some evaluation, it didn't seem worth it.
Allow multi-column layout T344389  Done
Auto-extract data from Template:Webarchive T342227  Done
Add support for generating a reference from a dead URL using an archive link T342225  Done
Add support for Wayback Machine date format T342221  Done When pasting a Wayback Machine timestamp like "20150801164830" (which by the way is the same format as MediaWiki timestamps) into a date field, a "Normalize date" button will appear, that when clicked, will normalize the date to the preferred format of the wiki.
Add link from DOI to Scholia T342220  Not done I couldn't understand this request and the author never replied.
Add support for Template:Cite Q T342218  Done Also for Template:Cite Hansard, Template:Cite newspaper The Times, Template:Cite ODNB and Template:Cite wikisource
Maybe add support for references that don't use templates at all T342228  Done When the content of a reference (or even a list item!) matches one of a few "citation patterns", Proveit can convert it to citation template by clicking the "Generate" button. See #New feature for details.
Improve support for RTL languages T148339  Done
Prompt users to save changes when leaving without saving T148211  Done
Make size and position persist between edits T148409  Half done Position persists, but size doesn't because it was never changeable in the first place because it's difficult and buggy. See T148409 for more.
Properly handle commented-out params Talk  Done Commented-out parameters now show as part of the previous parameter, rather than broken and half-parsed. If the commented-out parameter is the first parameter, the entire template will not be recognized and will show as raw wikitext, but such edge cases should be very rare.
Only pester users once with the link to WP:COSMETIC Talk  Done
Don't change parameter names or template names  Done Proveit used to "normalize" all parameter and template names to their canonical names. However, this feature was source of several complaints over the years (see here and here, for example). So it no longer does that. However, it still normalizes spacing a parameter order.
Button to Refresh the list of references  Done When the wikitext of a page is manually changed for whatever reason, Proveit's reference list may un-sync. To mitigate this, a "Refresh list" button was added that re-parses the wikitext and re-syncs the list.
Escape pipes in titles Talk  Done
Fix Firefox bug T236788  Not done Could not reproduce.
Fix tooltip bug T161958  Half done I was able to fix this issue using Codex tooltips, but then found out that the tooltips made the gadget painfully slow, so I had to revert back to the buggy tooltips. I reduced the tooltips size so that the bug is less likely to occur.
Update to current conventions, use async/await, const/let, arrow functions, etc  Done
Remove deprecated libraries like OOUI and jQuery UI  Half done I removed almost all dependencies on these libraries, but retained them for two particular purposes that are too complicated to do without them (OOUI confirmation dialogs and jQuery UI draggable feature). When T402356 is done and replacements are available, they can be easily removed.
Make use of the "new" VisualEditor hooks T389960  Done
Use prototypal inheritance T148219  Done Switched to JavaScript classes instead, but same result.
Maybe use WikitextParser.js  Done
Maybe use Vue.js  Done Proveit now uses Codex.

I just deployed the new version to the English Wikipedia. While I've done my due diligence, it's always likely that I missed some bugs or issues, so if you find one (or more), please take it easy, be cool, let me know and I'll do my best to fix them asap. Thanks for the support so far, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 16:15, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ProveIt is not working

[edit]

The new version of ProveIt has stopped working for me. When I click on the minimized gadget, showing as [P], it changes to [...], as though it is trying to expand to full size, but nothing further happens. I have tried using both Firefox and Edge, as well as disabling the gadget, signing out, signing back in, and enabling it again. The old version of the gadget does work. I’m guessing that this is not a widespread issue, but I hope that you can help me with it. I did need to set up my browsers again after “refreshing” my operating system, but I can’t figure out any changes that I would have made that would be causing this issue. Thank you for any assistance that you can provide.

—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 19:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! There's no recent new version of Proveit, or changes whatsoever. I just double checked and Proveit is working fine for me. Is anyone else having issues? Sophivorus (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply, Sophivorus. Mysteriously, the issue seems to have resolved. I have rebooted my computer in the interim, so perhaps that cleared up something that was affecting the gadget in both Firefox and Edge. Thanks again for your assistance!—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been having problems with ProveIt this week, just as Quick and Dirty User Account reported: the [P] icon turns to [...], but never fully loads. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Firsfron Hi, thanks for the report! When you visit https://gerrit.wikimedia.org, do you get a 403 Forbidden error? Sophivorus (talk) 12:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Firsfron of Ronchester 14:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Firsfron The two issues seem related. I just filed this bug report, but if it doesn't get attention soon, I'll do a workaround. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 13:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Firsfron Well, I got a quick reply and apparently the most likely cause of the 403 is that we are using browsers too old (at least that's true for me, as I haven't been able to update my browser for a long time due to old hardware). That being said, this problem shouldn't affect the gadget, so I'll definitely fix this if the grant I requested gets approved. Feel free to leave your feedback or support, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 13:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I got the same issue as Quick and Dirty User Account. When I click the "[P]" icon and it stuck on "[...]" loading. Until now, I can't use the gadget, I can't also cite some sources. ROY is WAR Talk! 04:13, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done This should be fixed now. Sophivorus (talk) 16:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Issues in forcing "work" parameter over "newspaper" and "publisher"

[edit]

Hello, I wanted to start a discussion here because an issue arose a couple weeks ago on the Avengers (Marvel Cinematic Universe) article because when ProveIt is run, it automatically replaces any |newspaper= or |publisher= parameters with the |work= parameter. I know that these are aliases of each other, but oftentimes, one is more adequate than the other, particularly when using {{Cite news}} for newspaper citations. Usually the Citation bot comes in and fixes some ref discrepancies, but this specific functionality I have found has to be remedied by another script, User:Ohconfucius/script/Sources, and is not always accurate in the changes being made. I was wondering if there was any way to rectify this irregularity to avoid editors having to manually restore parameter changes. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 17:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{publisher}} is not an alias of {{work}}/{{newspaper}}. — GreenC 04:29, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then that makes me question this even further, because the bot swaps "newspaper" and "publisher" for "work" when it shouldn't. I think the publisher bit may be an issue with {{Cite web}}, though. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 04:49, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure Proveit replaces "publisher" for "work"? Don't you mean it replaces "periodical" for "work"? In any case, during July-August I'll try to remove this kind of parameter-name normalization that has caused a lot of complaints over the years. Sophivorus (talk) 12:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's probably what I meant. There's just a lot of parameter changes I've noticed with this for a while now. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 15:19, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Proveit no longer changes parameter names. Sophivorus (talk) 16:26, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you so much! — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 17:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please add

[edit]

Please add {{Cite Hansard}}, {{Cite newspaper The Times}}, {{Cite ODNB}} and {{Cite wikisource}}. Thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 06:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Template:Cite ODNB has no template data yet. I'll try to add some later. Sophivorus (talk) 16:27, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interface question

[edit]

Hello. Did the interface for the gadget change? The background is transparent, which makes it harder to read on the classic editor. Also, the font got way bigger, which shows less fields. Not a fan of this change if it is intended, but I can adjust if I need to. Just wondering. Red Director (talk) 18:39, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Red Director Hi! The interface of the gadget did change, see #Grant closing. The background issue isn't happening to me. Perhaps the latest CSS isn't loading for you yet? Can you try a hard refresh (Shift + Ctrl + R) and let me know if anything changes? As to the font issue, do you have your text size set to "Large" in the appearance menu? Kind regards, Sophivorus (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus I will check! Thanks for the quick response. I like the change on detecting the template. I can get used to the changes. I appreciate all you do. Red Director (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus I did a hard refresh on an editing screen on an article and that did nothing. Is there a specific page I need to go to do the refresh? Also, not seeing the text size option on my preferences. Sorry to be so needy. I do like some of the new features though! Red Director (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus I found what seems to be the issue, for me at least. I use the 2010 legacy vector skin and I changed it to the 2022 one and the changes propagated. Red Director (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I user Vector 2010 and I will not be changing to the 2022 version any time soon. Will the tool forever be broken now, or is there a legacy version I can copy and use (which revision) or be added to the tool as fallback for those using this skin? Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Red Director Thanks for figuring it out! @Josve05a Take it easy man, I'll fix it tomorrow. Sophivorus (talk) 23:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I came across as harsh — English is still only my second language. I was just wondering if it would be possible to copy a past revision of the gadget to my own userspace as a fallback for the Vector 2010 skin. I really appreciate all your work! Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be broken in Monobook (weird font size, hard to choose templates, and when I choose a template it removes whatever I had entered in "Content"). Can this be fixed or is there a working version? I really love ProveIt and it would make Wikipedia editing much harder if it stops working. —Kusma (talk) 12:53, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Red Director @Josve05a Hi! The background and font issues should be fixed now. Let me know if they aren't, or if I missed something. @Kusma Is the "hard to choose templates" issue gone now with the fixed font size? As to the issue where selecting a template causes the content to be replaced, that is expected when creating a new template, but not when creating a new reference. When does it happen? Sophivorus (talk) 13:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it happens when I "add template". I don't really understand what that is supposed to mean. Previously, I could either add a "reference" or a bibliography entry; the only difference was that the "reference" contained <ref> tags. As I always use {{sfn}} (see for example my newest Solanum baretiae, all references formatted by ProveIt), I do not want <ref> tags, but I am looking for something that allows me to enter a URL or ISBN and choose whether it is a book or a journal. The old ProveIt then turned that into a formatted citation template ready to enter into my bibliography section. Now I am a bit confused what I am supposed to do (I think the input field where I could submit my data for the automation has been merged with the output field?) Anyway, thank you for fixing the size issues; the template chooser seems usable now, even if worse than the original one (only showing a limited selection and forcing me to scroll). —Kusma (talk) 13:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kusma I see. To do what you want, I think you can enter the URL/ISBN into the content field, click "Generate automatically" and then change the template to "Cite book" or "Cite journal" (but the new Proveit should generally guess the right template for you). As to the changes you mention, "Add bibliography" changed to "Add template" but it does exactly the same (create a citation template without a <ref> tag). The rename was because Template:Sfn, Template:R and others are not always used in bibliography sections, so the calling it "Add template" seemed more agnostic (see here for more context). As to the template chooser not being as optimal, sorry, I guess it's a trade-off for switching to Codex. Lastly, regarding the merge of the input and output fieds, I understand that can be confusing at first, but my reasoning was that this way, when a reference consists of a plain URL or a plain-text citation (see #New feature), you can use the same "Generate automatically" button to immediately "convert" the reference to a citation template. I hope some of this information helps. Please let me know if you find any more bugs or issues, I'd like to help! Cheers, Sophivorus (talk) 13:55, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds cool, I'll have to try that. For the name, I think "add template" is quite confusing (it sounds like it can add a new citation template to the list of existing ones). The old name worked fine; neither of the names make it truly clear that it is about inserting a filled citation template without a <ref> tag, so the new name is not worth the disruption of making a change. I wonder whether a tickbox "add <ref> tag" would work better than two separate buttons? —Kusma (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kusma I just did the tooltips of the "Add reference" and "Add template" buttons more prominent. Are they too annoying? The tickbox idea is good, but I'm afraid it would require a major rewrite. Regarding the input-output merge, I'm starting to think it was a bad idea, but I did a few tweaks that might help. Now, when creating a new reference or template, the content field is empty by default, so it's a bit more inviting. Also, when entering a URL/ISBN/etc and hitting the "Generate automatically" button, it used to update the form and require a second click. Now it should work as expected. Thanks for the feedback! Sophivorus (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus, I don't mind the tooltips. I do have a more serious bug report, though: the "insert" button (in "Template" version) should insert the "Content" at the cursor position (as it used to do). Instead, it inserts it after the fifteenth character in the edit window, which is almost never where you want it. If you do a fixed place, go for top or bottom, not something in the middle of a line. —Kusma (talk) 18:33, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This happens to me as well - the reference is always being inserted in the wrong location. Greenman (talk) 20:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kusma @Greenman  Fixed Apologies for that, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 12:21, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New feature

[edit]

Hi! As some of you know, I'm finishing a two-month grant to update and improve the gadget (see #Grant closing). There's a few new features, but there's one in particular that I think deserves special attention: now Proveit has the capability of automatically converting some plain-text, well-formed citations like the following:

  • Darwin, Charles (1859) On the Origin of Species
  • Vaughn, Stephen L. (2009) Encyclopedia of American Journalism pp. 3-9

into citation templates. Proveit searches for these plain-text citations not only inside <ref> tags but also in list items (as they often appear in bibliography sections). When one is found, it will be listed alongside the other references and can be converted into a citation template by opening it up an clicking the "Generate" button.

To find these plain-text citations, Proveit relies on "citation patterns" (technically regular expressions). So far, I only wrote a couple of citation patterns, but if you share here some examples of well-formed plain-text citations you'd like Proveit to recognize, I can write a citation pattern for them.

I remember spending quite some time formatting plain-text citations into templates back in the day. This new feature should help with that. I hope you find it useful! Sophivorus (talk) 13:43, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sort parameter when using "normalize all" function

[edit]

i just noticed that parameter is not sorted anymore since 1 september(?)

is this intended or is it a bug? for example on this edit parameter is sorted when i use the function

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023%E2%80%9324_in_English_football&diff=prev&oldid=1308779718 Lokiretro (talk) 21:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have also noticed this, I'm not sure what the normalise button is even doing if it isn't normalising the parameter order for all citations. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lokiretro @Adamstom.97  Done Thanks, I was actually about to propose removing the "Normalize all" button since it no longer changes parameter names (see this and this, among other requests) and only normalized spacing. But normalizing parameter order makes perfect sense and justifies the "Normalize all" button still existing. So I just improved Proveit to normalize parameter order. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 12:14, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for the fix. i can confirm this is fixed
im new to this, so i dont know if this is the correct workflow
normalize reference -> copy to nvim -> working on text -> copy from nvim to wiki -> normalize reference again
when this function is broken i tried other script but cant find the one that do the order Lokiretro (talk) 13:20, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lokiretro Hi! If I understand your workflow correctly, the only tip I can give is that when you copy your text back to the wiki, you might want to click the new "Refresh list" button before clicking "Normalize all", so that Proveit re-parses the wikitext before normalizing. Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 15:20, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bug in the new version

[edit]

Heavy ProveIt user here. The new version has one or maybe two serious problems.

  1. The insert or update very commonly (but not always) inserts over the first dozen or so characters in the edit buffer. This makes the tool very annoying to use: you need to cut the new ref out of the edit buffer, undo the changes to get back the erased characters, reposition the cursor, and paste.
  2. The gadget does not fold up after use. The previous version closed the tool as soon as the preview window updated.

Johnjbarton (talk) 22:21, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have also to add that need to fix:
1. The "Generate automatically" which is in old version was generated the link automatically like the author name, title, source date etc.
On the other hand, I slightly disagree to Johnjbarton, 'cause it is also helpful the update of the gadget does not fold up automatically, like, you don't need to click every time when citing a large reference, or maybe there should be an option to choose whether the gadget fold up automatically or remain expanded. (IMO) ROY is WAR Talk! 02:27, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Royiswariii The "Generate automatically" feature exists, it just has a different UI. Now you put the ISBN or DOI or URL in the content box and click the button below it.
Surprise! I never used ProveIt for anything other than inserting new refs based on "Generate automatically". So I never thought about using it twice for the same ref. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:54, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnjbarton Hi! The first issue should be fixed. Regarding the second, having Proveit remain open when reloading the realtime preview was a request by someone else (though I can't find the link). If you collapse Proveit, it should remain collapsed too. Is it a "serious problem" for your workflow?
@Johnjbarton @Kusma After some thought, I changed the UI back to how it was before, with a separate input field for automatic citations. It's just more clear this way, and the code is simpler too (hopefully I didn't screw up). As a bonus, when the content of a reference is a plain URL or a citation pattern (see #New feature) the automatic citation field will be automatically pre-populated with it so that you only need to click the Generate button. Let me know what you think, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus The Generate Button is working on me now (I just test it as of this writing). The UI is great too as I read the New Feature. I don't have any problem for now. Thanks. ROY is WAR Talk! 14:59, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was my request that it stays open after reloading the preview. I made it in this comment. Nobody (talk) 14:07, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus latest version of the UI is great, but the cursor repositioning problem is very annoying and add a potential for introducing errors. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:48, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnjbarton What "cursor repositioning problem" do you mean? Do you mean this one? Is it still happening to you? Sophivorus (talk) 11:18, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, exactly. But now that I read your message I see that this issue has changed. I'll get more experience and report back. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing ProveIt! I think I am figuring out the new UI. I really appreciate that "automatic references" are back. I did also run into the problem of the insert point changing. I'll be testing out the tool over the next few weeks. Firsfron of Ronchester 16:17, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New UI

[edit]

Is there a way to go back to the old UI? The new one is harder to use. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be helpful to discuss what you found difficult in the new UI. I've used both and they seem very similar with the new one slightly better. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:34, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, it seems the transparency issue has been fixed. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:48, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

[edit]

In the Russian Wikipedia, when adding a link in the automatic citation generator field, the cite web template is generated with an incorrect publication date format. For example, instead of 2007-02-23 it generates 23 февраля 2007 г. It would be good to fix this. Skazi (talk) 10:50, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Skazi  Done Should be fixed now, else let me know! Sophivorus (talk) 13:43, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Everything’s great! Thanks so much! Skazi (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Insert" button missing

[edit]

Hello, I tried using ProveIt today with two different accounts, across two different browsers and using two different skins, and in both instances, the "Insert" button is gone, so I cannot add any references I generate with the feature. Only the "reuse", "remove", and "update" buttons are still present, aside from "Show all". Victor Lopes Fala!•C 16:12, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Try "Update" as in "update the page with this new citation". Johnjbarton (talk) 17:02, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did, to no avail. The only thing I can do is hit the "reuse" button to add some "<ref name="example" />" around, but they'll have no source to evoke unless I create it some other way (i.e. manually or with another feature). Victor Lopes Fala!•C 17:16, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sophivorus, I am experiencing the same issue as described above by Victor Lopez. The programme was functioning as intended until yesterday (7 September). I am using the Vector 2022 skin. Regards. QEnigma 论 17:04, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnjbarton @Victor Lopes @QEnigma Apologies, I'm on it. Give me a few minutes. Sophivorus (talk) 17:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Sophivorus. In addition, once a citation was inserted in the previous version, the UI collapsed back to its tab automatically which was convenient. This no longer occurs and now requires manual input. Regards. QEnigma 论 17:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Insert issue should be fixed now. Regarding @QEnigma's request that Proveit collapses right after a reference is inserted, if no one objects to it, I may implement it soon. Sophivorus (talk) 17:26, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the collapse-on-insert behavior. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@QEnigma @Johnjbarton Proveit should now collapse after insert, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 11:05, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sophivorus: Thank you. QEnigma 论 11:46, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful thanks! Johnjbarton (talk) 02:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the attention and swift reply, @Sophivorus! All seems fine now. Victor Lopes Fala!•C 21:21, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was having the same issue with the "Insert" button being missing, but it's resolved now! Thanks for the swift action. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference name

[edit]

Not sure how to describe this, but it seems the "Reference name" is not working properly - if I update a citation which is named (e.g. <ref name = "Bernstein1997">Reference.</ref>) the tool changes <ref name = "Bernstein1997"> to just <ref>. I had to re-add it manually, see diff. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed (diff), thanks for the report! Sophivorus (talk) 11:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bot to convert 'pages=' to 'article-number=' in sources?

[edit]

Seems to be a fairly recent (within a few weeks) maintenance message appearing in preview for references.

Wasn't able to find in archives whether a bot has been developed (apparently not deployed) to automatically repair sources showing in an edit preview the message: "Script warning: One or more {{cite journal}} templates have maintenance messages; messages may be hidden (help)."

I have been fixing many of these manually, but a repair bot would be helpful. For an example, see Osteoarthritis in an edit preview, displaying that 42 references need an "article-number=" fix, with the message in the reference section stating: "{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: article number as page number (link)". Zefr (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested a post on this topic here in case changes to ProveIt could be made to prevent inserting {{cite journal}} entries with page= when article-number= would be correct. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:53, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trappist the monk: I've read through your good analysis and technical discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 99, particularly this section, but it isn't clear to me that a script or bot fix resulted. I see this maintenance message in hundreds of sources, especially those of MEDRS, e.g., Osteoarthritis mentioned above.
Can you provide an update please on progress toward a solution, and how editors can efficiently deal with this cleanup? Thanks. Zefr (talk) 16:00, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that nowhere in that discussion did I suggest that I had written or intended to write a script or bot that would change |page(s)= to |article-number=. That being the case, the lack of a bot or script should not come as a surprise to you.
But, as it happens, over the past few days I have been writing an awb script for my own use that addresses the issue. I do not intend to make it public nor do I intend to bot-i-fy it. I have run the script against this version of Osteoarthritis (permalink); see this diff.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That script certainly did the trick, with appreciation for your skill.
Pardon my limited technical knowledge or script convention between technical editors, but why would the script not be publicly shared or botified? Finding this maintenance message so frequently, I would certainly install and use it only as needed. Zefr (talk) 18:25, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because I would have to maintain it as a public script more-or-less forever. Not bot-i-fied because a bot making a nearly invisible fix (naught more than removing a colon from a {{cite journal}} rendering), might be accused of violating WP:COSMETICBOT. I would then have to defend the bot's actions or shut it down. This |page(s)= → |article-number= issue isn't a hill I want to die on.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:43, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As maybe ye'd say, it's a doddle to ken once summat's spelt oot. Zefr (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ProveIt just...doesn't work

[edit]

It's all well and good modifying a handful of references in bulk at once, until you click "Submit" and...nothing.

No revision is made. All the work is lost.

What's going on? from Piperium (chit-chat, i did that) at 23:35, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can't tell what happened to you because your description is incomplete and unclear, sorry. I use ProveIt every day and it works great.
Did you click the Update button? Did you see the wikitext change in the edit window? There is no "Submit" button. Johnjbarton (talk) 00:09, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:ProveIt&oldid=1312852836"