Tostop Monkbot, add a message to itstalk page. Comments and questions about Monkbot are welcome here.

I noticed that Monkbot has been clearing this category. I'm wondering if there is a way to resolve the remaining articles in the category listedhere since for both of the articles the maintenance category is in the "Academic peer reviewed" template.Velayinosu (talk)02:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you follow the wikidata qid links from those{{Academic peer reviewed}} to wikidata you will see that in both cases, wikidata usespage(s)(P304) to hold the article number

Viral Phylodynamics(Q21045423):P304 → e1002947

Viral quasispecies(Q86320171):P304 → e1008271

So far as I know, wikidata does not support article numbers. Because of that,{{cite q}}, which creates the citation in the final{{Academic peer reviewed}} rendering, does not know about|article-number=.

At present there is no way to resolve this issue in{{Academic peer reviewed}} renderings.

—Trappist the monk (talk)14:00, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, same with the unsupported|doi-access=free which I had to implement in{{cite q}} because Wikidata doesn't support flagging identifiers as free (including bibcode-access, jstor-access, ssrn-access, etc...).Headbomb {t ·c ·p ·b}14:05, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. You meant{{Cite Q EtAl}} (hate that name... no need for the stupid caps). I have tweaked{{Academic peer reviewed}},{{Academic peer reviewed/talk}}, and{{Academic peer reviewed/other}} to pass|article-number= to{{Cite Q EtAl}}:

{{Academic peer reviewed|Q21045423|doi-access=free|article-number=e1002947}}

This article wasadapted fromErik M Volz; Katia Koelle;Trevor Bedford (21 March 2013)."Viral phylodynamics".PLOS Computational Biology.9 (3) e1002947.doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PCBI.1002947.ISSN 1553-734X.PMC 3605911.PMID 23555203.Wikidata Q21045423. afterpeer review (reviewer reports) under aCC BY 4.0 license (2013).

So there is a sort-of-fix that can be applied as a limited workaround;|pages= from wikidata is overridden.

—Trappist the monk (talk)15:17, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to{{Cite Q et al}} perWP:TPN, hope that's fine. — Qwerfjkltalk11:34, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the page "Leadbeater's_possum" earlier today, and I just went to edit it again, and I noticed that most of the references were not displaying. When I looked at the version history, references displaying went from 43 to 15 after Monkbot edited the page on 2 October. All the references appear when the page is in edit mode, so presumably they are still there, just not displaying properly. Are you able to fix this?EighteenFiftyNine (talk)02:44, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old bug; long since fixed. I think that I have restored your edit but you had better check.

—Trappist the monk (talk)02:59, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. Thanks!EighteenFiftyNine (talk)03:49, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your long and voluminous record helping to make Wikipedia a better place.😊 I have been around 6 years longer and have managed less than a tenth as many edits. (and I retired from my day job 4 years ago)Blainster (talk)22:31, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]