Help talk:References: Difference between revisions
From Tolkien Gateway
mNo edit summary |
(Similar claims in different articles) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Articles with only one source== | |||
Where to put and how to use referencing, when you only have one source for an article (which has many sections or paragraphs)? | Where to put and how to use referencing, when you only have one source for an article (which has many sections or paragraphs)? | ||
#Inline references (footnotes) for every paragraph | #Inline references (footnotes) for every paragraph | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
Anyone recognize this problem? --[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 00:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | Anyone recognize this problem? --[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 00:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
==Similar claims in different articles== | |||
Sometimes there are claims which I find are better (or more properly) explained in a different article. Shouldn't the reference only be used in that 'proper' article? | |||
*Example 1) Yesterday I was editing the article [[Fire-drakes]]. There is a reference to Smaug, and that he was killed by Bard. Now, the article on Fire-drakes isn't really concerned about the details of Smaug. Do we then need a reference for the general claims that are made about Smaug in the article on Fire-drakes? | |||
*Example 2) In the page for Quenya ''[[atar]]'', we have the claim that it is derived from root [[ATA]]. If you go to the article on ATA you find the reference for this claim. But is it really needed to also have this reference on the ''atar'' page? | |||
--[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 00:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:33, 13 December 2010
Articles with only one source
Where to put and how to use referencing, when you only have one source for an article (which has many sections or paragraphs)?
- Inline references (footnotes) for every paragraph
- Pros: It's easy to add new fact to an article, using a different source
- Cons: Clutters up the text with many footnotes
- Just put the source at the bottom (no footnotes)
- Pros: Doesn't clutter up the text (obviously!)
- Cons: If new info is added from a different source, it's hard to say to where each reference is pointing
Anyone recognize this problem? --Morgan 00:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Similar claims in different articles
Sometimes there are claims which I find are better (or more properly) explained in a different article. Shouldn't the reference only be used in that 'proper' article?
- Example 1) Yesterday I was editing the article Fire-drakes. There is a reference to Smaug, and that he was killed by Bard. Now, the article on Fire-drakes isn't really concerned about the details of Smaug. Do we then need a reference for the general claims that are made about Smaug in the article on Fire-drakes?
- Example 2) In the page for Quenya atar, we have the claim that it is derived from root ATA. If you go to the article on ATA you find the reference for this claim. But is it really needed to also have this reference on the atar page?
--Morgan 00:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
