This is the talk page for Template:Ref.
See Saints Row Wiki:Discussions for discussion policies.

equals Edit

Something I noticed a while ago but have been too busy to track down is that you can't pass a equal sign (=) in a template, because it assumes your trying to use a named parameter, which sucks because of urls sometimes contain = signs. I'm trying to find a workaround. --452 21:55, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

That would explain why it hates YouTube links. Good luck with finding a fix. – Moozipan Cheese(talk page) 21:57, October 21, 2011 (UTC)
There are two ways: {{=}}, or {{{|=}}} - in the case of the second one, you can just put the whole url in there: {{{|}}}
Now we just need to remember this, and teach others. --452 22:11, October 21, 2011 (UTC)
There's also a third way. {{ref|name|2=}} --452 22:23, October 21, 2011 (UTC)
I like that third way the best, much less complicated. I'm going to remove the other methods from the page, because they're just too confusing.
I was considering adding optional named parameters "name" and "ref", but they're just unnecessary. 1=name, 2=ref, it's not complicated.
I've also realised that I can fix the problem with having only a single parameter - I'm going to leave it as is over night, to allow Broken references to update first. -452 00:56, March 30, 2013 (UTC)


I've changed the blank name handling to use the reference text as the name - so two references with the exact same reference text will automatically be merged. This allows copy/pasting references without having to worrying about adding a name.
Tomorrow, I'll be changing the single parameter handling so that the single parameter is also used as both the name and reference. I don't know why this didn't occur to me when I created the template, as it's something that has always been bugging me. But at least it's fixed now, and so the template will be a lot easier to use from now on.
Of course, there will probably be some bug I haven't thought about. My test cases look good. One thing that may happen is that when there's a typo in a named reference, it won't throw an error, it will just use the typo-name as the name and reference. -452 01:41, March 30, 2013 (UTC)
Hey 452. I posted a similar issue on your talk page (furthermore, I have moved it here), I think the above message almost answers it :)
Do you know how I can use the {{Ref}} template to direct two or more lines to the same reference in the references list at the bottom of an article? I was thinking of adding a reference to the "and Briefly in Saints Row: The Third" (first introductory line) on this article, as I have seen other articles with similar lines, with references indicating its "brief" appearance. On this page, I noticed the description further down references their only appearance, and is seen linked in the references list at the bottom of the page. I thought it might be useful to put the reference just after "Saints Row: The Third" in the introductory line, like other pages, but I can't seem to get the reference to link to the already-present reference of the mission they appear in.
Sorry if that makes barely any sense. I can't make it make any more sense :P
Thanks :)
Since what you are saying in the aforementioned message almost answers my question, can I ask how exactly can I get this working in an article? I did just as you have explained, naming the exact same reference, in the article mentioned in my message, however it didn't merge as you state it should, it simply created a new reference of the same name under the previous reference. Is there a way to fix this or a technique to get it working? Thanks :) Monk Talk 19:35, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
Quoting yourself is unnecessary.
If you had copied the reference, it would have merged.
Exactly how to get this working in an article: follow the instructions, and look at the thousands of examples throughout the wiki.
Read Help:Cite, then read Template:Ref, then do what it says on Template:Ref, save your edit, and if it doesn't work, undo the edit, then I will look at what you did wrong and explain it. But I'm not going to address a hypothetical unpublished edit without examples.
In this specific case, a reference in the lead is not a requirement. -452 21:34, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. Apologies for the inconvenience; I realised in my edit I had actually missed one closing square bracket. Also, I myself was contemplating whether it was necessary to place a reference there; I saw plenty of other examples of references placed after the lead, but in terms of a clone reference in the description, I have yet to find an example. Perhaps moving the reference to the lead, and simply stating the mission name/plot description in the description section without the need of making it into a reference, would be more consistent and match other, similar cases? (Apologies if this is adjourning to the specific example rather than the template itself). Monk Talk 21:55, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
I've reviewed the references regarding Saints Row: The Third in the Stilwater Police Department article, and how they currently are is consistent with how mission references are supposed to be used.
"in terms of a clone reference in the description, I have yet to find an example"
The "Changes" mentioned in the first comment in this section are regarding that when you copy/paste a reference multiple times in an article, it automatically merges. If you're unable to find a reference that you want to "clone", then ... I really have no clue what you're trying to do, how you're trying to do it it, or why you think that it's not working if you're not attempting to copy/paste references. -452 22:49, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
Ah. I appear to have confused you; the intention of merging references was only because I couldn't come to the conclusion of whether the reference was best in (or only in) the description (at the time, I hadn't found any similar cases of a reference of the same type being in both the description and the lead), or whether it was best in the lead (I had found numerous examples of the reference being only in the lead to support this idea). I merely came to discuss how this works under the basis of interest, since I thought I couldn't get it working (as I've stated, however, it turns out it was an accidental coding issue on my behalf). Since you have reviewed the references and are satisfied, I will leave it at that. Thank you for verifying. Apologies if I have wasted your time. Monk Talk 23:12, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.