As the citation scripts add load time to the page (as I have been informed by the support) they are only provided on pages, which explicitly request it, like on Math.SE or CS Theory.SE.

So I was asked to bring it before the meta.

It seems sensible to provide bibtex style citations for TeX.SE, so technical references and acknowledgements can be given where they are due without too much work.

How is the consesus on this in this community?

An example citation for CS Theory.SE looks like this

@MISC {352,
    TITLE = {"All-different hypergraph coloring" - known problem?},
    AUTHOR = {Falk Hüffner (https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/users/251/falk-h%c3%bcffner)},
    HOWPUBLISHED = {Theoretical Computer Science Stack Exchange},
    NOTE = {URL:https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/q/352 (version: 2010-08-20)},
    EPRINT = {https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/q/352},
    URL = {https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/q/352}

The additional cite button

The citation as it is presented

| |
  • 2
    Can you provide some more information on what is meant by "the citation scripts"? Could you also include examples of how this is already used elsewhere on the StackExchange network? – Werner Sep 16 '19 at 19:22
  • Should I add more references @Werner ? – 927589452 Sep 16 '19 at 19:36
  • 1
    And how will this be used within a post? Can you add an image? – Werner Sep 16 '19 at 19:51
  • added two pictures – 927589452 Sep 16 '19 at 20:01
  • 2
    Oh, I see... you want to add the option to "cite" a specific TeX.SE post, not add citations within a TeX.SE post. So that would add cite to the current list of options (share edit close flag). – Werner Sep 16 '19 at 20:04
  • yes; that was not clear. the idea is to cite specific versions easily – 927589452 Sep 16 '19 at 20:08
  • Could you provide examples of where this would be useful and better than just linking to the answer? As I see it, answers here only ever get improved (or deleted), so it is quite useful for links to go to the most recent versions. Things may have changed, better solutions been made available since the reference was created. – schtandard Sep 18 '19 at 15:40
  • The citation of a defined version would make clear, where the work was done; the newer versions are still available from that version @schtandard. – 927589452 Sep 18 '19 at 20:48
  • If a newer version starts breaking other hack depending on the original version, this might be problematic. – 927589452 Sep 18 '19 at 20:49
  • But the more important point for my use case is the bibtex generation – 927589452 Sep 18 '19 at 20:50
  • In the case that an answer is useful, you may wish to include it reference list of another publication (and I have done this!). One can easily construct the citation manually for bibtex. However, my experience with the various online citation scripts (esp. GoogleScholar) is that they are unreliable in dealing with names (GS actually removes author names when its parser can't figure out how to process it). Also, most of these scripts do not use the correct ordering of complex names in bibtex, transposing suffixes and given names, or putting minus signs in place of en dashes in page ranges. – John Sep 25 '19 at 23:59
  • therefore the generation by SE seems to be the best way to go (and the scripts exist already) @John – 927589452 Sep 26 '19 at 10:28
  • 1
    Yes, if the SE scripts do not have the errors. Tex-SE seems like the one venue that should get this right.. – John Sep 26 '19 at 11:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .