1,767
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + + + +
no edit summary
* I prefer the citations to follow normal publishers rules, and keeping them in the same paragraph in which the material being cited is. If they are at the bottom of the page, how is one to know? Since I didn't add other information, and it was not needed, I just don't see the reasoning, lol. Without the stuff at the bottom, mousing over the number shows the links, etc. Oh well, different strokes, as they saying goes. :-) --[[User:TK|TK]] 11:08, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
* I prefer the citations to follow normal publishers rules, and keeping them in the same paragraph in which the material being cited is. If they are at the bottom of the page, how is one to know? Since I didn't add other information, and it was not needed, I just don't see the reasoning, lol. Without the stuff at the bottom, mousing over the number shows the links, etc. Oh well, different strokes, as they saying goes. :-) --[[User:TK|TK]] 11:08, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
**Um, actually, the "short footnote marker, longer explanation of source at the end" style can also be considered a normal publisher rule. And in longer articles, you can click the footnote to jump directly to the note at the bottom (and from there, you can jump back up). It's also nice to have a link description to give people an idea what is behind the link. Things get worse when you want to quote books and such. A "References" section also allows a reader to check quickly what material the article is based on. A good example of where footnotes would be VERY helpful is [[Theory of evolution]]. 114 unnamed links, spread all over the article. Compare that (for example) with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution the Wikipedia page on Evolution], and you will see how a Reference section can contain helpful extra information about a source. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 11:47, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
==References==
<references/>