Revision as of 11:17, 21 June 2025 edit Headbomb (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 473,210 edits deleted ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 11:17, 21 June 2025 edit undo Headbomb (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 473,210 edits ce
Line 5: There has always been a problem with the {{tlx\|harv}} and {{tlx\|sfn}} families of templates: except that every link that is created by these templates is tested at creation, editors don't know if the link works. A remedy for that has been user-scripts like [[User:Ucucha/HarvErrors]]. But, not all editors use that script so broken harv links can go undetected for a long time. At the moment, there is [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/AntiCompositeBot\|prospective bot]] that would mark broken-link harv templates by adding {{tlx\|broken footnote}} after the broken-link harv template. I have another possible solution. I have created a [[Module:Sandbox/trappist the monk/harv link test\|lua module]] that extracts reference linking data from cs1\|2 ~~and vcite~~ templates. I have modified [[Module:Footnotes/sandbox]] to use the extracted data to determine if: :the harv template does not have a matching citation template :more than one citation template matches the harv template

Module talk:Footnotes/anchor id list: Difference between revisions