This is an old revision of this page, as edited by R.e.b. (talk | contribs) at 19:18, 25 May 2011 (→Bug report: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:18, 25 May 2011 by R.e.b. (talk | contribs) (→Bug report: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Suggestion
Not so much a bug as a pair of suggestions. In this edit the bot added a (correct) bibcode field to a reference. However it a) ignored an already existing but empty |bibcode= field within the same citation template, and b) added the field in horizontal layout, whilst the rest of the fields in that template are in vertical layout. It would be nice if the bot could recognise both of these and change its behaviour accordingly. Modest Genius 16:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
- That's a somewhat older version of the code. The current version inserts bibcodes at the correct place. Figuring out whether things should be on the same line or on a new line isn't yet implemented, but it's on the list of things to do. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 06:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Bug report
Bibcode bot got confused at Template:Cite doi/10.1007.2FBF02102090. r.e.b. (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)