Category talk:CS1 errors: dates

1997-09

IIRC this is a perfectly valid RFC 3339 (ISO 8601) month used on NetRexx; as it happens the Date and Time Formats note published 1997-09 by the W3C also confirms this theory. It's certainly not 1700-02-29, 1800-02-29, or 1900-02-29. The latter could be a "valid" ISO OOXML Excel date, but I digress... –Be..anyone (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Citation Style 1, nor the English Wikipedia, support ISO 8601 dates. Year initial dates in the form YYY-MM-DD are allowed by WP:DATESNO but the ISO 8601 YYYY-MM dates are not. There is quite a bit of discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Is YYYY-MM an acceptable date format? Part 2.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I added my € 0,02 somewhere on this confusing talk page. Any guideline trying to overrule the IETF, ISO, and W3C by a rough consensus of about ten editors has a serious notability issue. Bot warnings forcing editors to invent YYYY-MM-DD timestamps out of thin air, or drop a known month in YYYY-MM, are just wrong. –Be..anyone (talk) 14:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect parameter used

I have fixed a significant number of articles in this category for cricketers having |date=CrickrtArchive would be good if someone could fix these to |publisher=CrickrtArchive automatically rather than manually. Looks like the same thing has been copied and pasted to many articles. Keith D (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

This page has very few watchers. Most discussion happens at Help_talk:Citation_Style_1. For this particular message, I recommend visiting User_talk:GoingBatty#Proposed_date_fixes_for_BattyBot_.28Task_25.29. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks I have posed there. Keith D (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)