Template talk:R

Backlinks?

The references to backlinks are confusing. Several examples of |a= show rendering with no backlinks. There is an example of an annotation that includes #[[#L1|^]], with no explanation of what that markup means and no link to its documentation. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:37, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Strange behaviour

When the text of a named reference contain the template {{harv}} all the text is enclosed in parenthesis. For instance, from this: {{r|n=Myname|r={{harv|Armand|2000|p=12}}.}}, I get "(Armand 2000 p. 12)". Instead if I use {{harvp}} everything is correct, that is "Armand (2000) p. 12". where does this behaviour come from? Please help. Carlotm (talk) 02:52, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're trying to do. harv and harvp are for an entirely different citation technique. EEng 03:36, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

When a short note, which I link to the full citation through {{sfn}} (or {{sfnp}}) is being repeated more than once, I use {{r}} and, obviously, I must replace {{sfn}} (or {{sfnp}}) with {{harv}} (or {{harvp}}). What's wrong with all this? Unfortunately I cannot use {{harv}} because the entire short note is getting, unexpectedly, enclosed in parenthesis. I wonder why.Carlotm (talk) 04:16, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

@Carlotm you want {{harvnb}} (no brackets). {{harv}} is meant to add parentheses; it was used for inline parenthetical citations before they were deprecated. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:56, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

@Rjjiii That's it! I am very pleased. Thanks Rjjiii, very much.Carlotm (talk) 06:06, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Also, if you're using sfn or sfnp you don't need to jump through hoops using r to reuse footnotes rather than making duplicate footnotes: they will do it automatically. Just copy the same sfn or sfnp code in each place you want to use it; you will only get one footnote, reused in each place. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:16, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete "p=" parameter

For example,

This parameter is very confusing for non-editor readers. What are they supposed to understand from it? A math equation? What does 1/22 even mean?

I suggest deleting this confusing parameter. There are plenty of other templates that already include page numbers, such as Cite book. IdanST (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

References

See ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources § Referencing individual page numbers by embedding pdf links. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

It's a variant of the AMA style. See this explanation for an example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:31, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Easy ready enhancement - Display quotation when no locator is supplied

Display a small dagger (†) when {{r}} has a quotation but no page, pages, or location parameter/ Currently, the quotation is present but has no visible tooltip target.

I made a proof of concept at User:Very Polite Person/draft/Template:Rqi, demonstrated at User:Very Polite Person/sandbox. Existing output is unchanged; the dagger appears only when a quotation is supplied without a locator.

See here and mouse over the dagger symbol with dotted underscore: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Very_Polite_Person/sandbox&oldid=1364282264

This was done by changing this:

|location{{#if:{{{location1|{{{location|{{{loc1|{{{1loc|{{{loc|{{{at1|{{{at|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}||NULL}}={{{location1|{{{location|{{{loc1|{{{1loc|{{{loc|{{{at1|{{{at|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

To:

|location{{#if:{{#if:{{{location1|{{{location|{{{loc1|{{{1loc|{{{loc|{{{at1|{{{at|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|x|{{#if:{{{page1|{{{page|{{{p1|{{{1p|{{{p|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}{{{pages1|{{{pages|{{{pp1|{{{1pp|{{{pp|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}||{{#if:{{{quotation1|{{{quotation|{{{quote1|{{{quote|{{{q1|{{{q|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|x}}}}}}||NULL}}={{#if:{{{location1|{{{location|{{{loc1|{{{1loc|{{{loc|{{{at1|{{{at|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|{{{location1|{{{location|{{{loc1|{{{1loc|{{{loc|{{{at1|{{{at|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|{{#if:{{{page1|{{{page|{{{p1|{{{1p|{{{p|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}{{{pages1|{{{pages|{{{pp1|{{{1pp|{{{pp|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}||{{#if:{{{quotation1|{{{quotation|{{{quote1|{{{quote|{{{q1|{{{q|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|†}}}}}}

This would allow this template to then display quotes ad hoc, inline, on any reference usage - and for good measure, it'll be the easiest way to use/deploy quotes for in-line usage like this. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 17:21, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Why would you use r when there is no page, pages, or location parameter? If you're using it with cs1 just put the quote in quote= PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:32, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

I've been in the habit of trying to keep the same uniform style within articles I'm doing, and r is pretty great for simple reuse of named refs (list defined) and assigning snippets of quotes inline (see Amanda Jones (inventor). I put up a mock edit here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amanda_Jones_(inventor)&diff=next&oldid=1364313524

Of what it could look like to do this with a site that has no page identifiers. This would let you use a website article, say, any number of times, and each usage could have it's own unique in-line quote value. Beats using rp, ref combos and other stuff--keeps it all in the r wrapper with this one change. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 21:38, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that that is massive, massive overkill and I'd oppose adding that. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

The ability to have unique quotes inline against a single URL source is overkill? Or because of using r? That's basically all I was after, that specific use case. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 21:49, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA, Very Polite Person: Yes, if anything the template should be modified to emit an error when used with a quote but without a location or page. For a website article, you could use something like the {{r|RefName|at=para. 7}} example given in the documentation, but the citation format used by this template is confusing enough without introducing seemingly meaningless notation such as ^1:† into the mix. Hopefully this whole mess goes away when meta:WMDE Technical Wishes/Sub-referencing is enabled and we can refactor this template to use that format instead. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:46, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

• Opposed to adding unfamiliar notation. Mathglot (talk) 07:46, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

I would advise against using quotes in {{r}} (regardless of the page number) due to accessibility issues. @Quiddity already mentioned some issues a few years ago (issues for screenreaders and discoverability problems – how many readers will realize that they can hover over the page number to see details like a quote?). The tooltip also doesn't seem to work on mobile devices which means the majority of readers cannot access it at all. --Johannnes89 (talk) 09:33, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

well, shit. Back to formula. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 14:16, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I suppose I need to bite the bullet and start doing sfn/sfnq like this then... https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historiography_of_science&oldid=1357780379#cite_note-12

R was just so visually simple/intuitive and the compactness as a view is delightful, but that's the price, I suppose. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 15:15, 20 July 2026 (UTC)