Gives first 9 authors for papers with many authors

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
See 
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aspergillus_oryzae&diff=377272497&old
id=370499106 this] diff for a citation bot edit.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
When citing papers with several dozen authors I think the best approach is to 
simply name the first author and use ''et al.''.  The bot tried to add other 
authors but stopped arbitrarily after the 9th author.  It also added an ''et 
al.'' in addition to one already present.

If applicable, please provide a link to an errant edit made by the bot.
(See above.)

How was the bot initiated?
Don't know.

Please provide any additional information below.
These kinds of papers are getting more and more common and there will surely be 
plenty of citations in Wikipedia now and in the future to biology papers with 
dozens of authors.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by adrianth...@gmail.com on 5 Aug 2010 at 11:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I didn't expect my Gmail username to show up in the report... My Wikipedia talk 
page is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Adrian_J._Hunter

Original comment by adrianth...@gmail.com on 5 Aug 2010 at 11:16

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The bot should have set display-authors=1 when it detected the ''et al'' in the 
author's name.  I'll try to get it to do this anon.

Original comment by MartinS on 5 Aug 2010 at 9:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

why should only one author be used? apa says up to five should be used in the 
first citation and only the first in subsequent citations. mla says up to three 
should be used in the first citation and only one in subsequent. not sure about 
chicago and turabian.

Original comment by chriscapoccia on 10 Jan 2011 at 8:09