Changes

*I agree with Philip's take here.  Not one rule can fit all, and our focus, always, should be on increasing content at this not mature wiki, where we really don't have the luxury of making it more cumbersome, as Conservative pointed out.  Rules need to remain flexible in the formative stages, as we are still in, and can certainly be made to be more in compliance as we progress.  Also, there are editors who love nothing more than to fix citations and formatting.  Let us not be slaves to procedure at the risk of discouraging contributors who don't care much for formatting rules, and complications.  --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] _{[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]} 07:15, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

*I agree with Philip's take here.  Not one rule can fit all, and our focus, always, should be on increasing content at this not mature wiki, where we really don't have the luxury of making it more cumbersome, as Conservative pointed out.  Rules need to remain flexible in the formative stages, as we are still in, and can certainly be made to be more in compliance as we progress.  Also, there are editors who love nothing more than to fix citations and formatting.  Let us not be slaves to procedure at the risk of discouraging contributors who don't care much for formatting rules, and complications.  --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] _{[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]} 07:15, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

:On the one hand, as you say, there are people who love nothing more than fixing up the formatting, etc.  But on the other hand, it is less work to get it right in the first place than to do a whole lot of stuff without any guidelines then having to go back later and change it all to comply with some quality standards.  One thing that Wikipedia suffers from (understandably) is a proliferation of templates, formats, and styles that have been added to in a very ad hoc way.  We have the opportunity here to try and get things right before we go too far down the track of creating a mess that becomes too large to fix later.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:25, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

:On the one hand, as you say, there are people who love nothing more than fixing up the formatting, etc.  But on the other hand, it is less work to get it right in the first place than to do a whole lot of stuff without any guidelines then having to go back later and change it all to comply with some quality standards.  One thing that Wikipedia suffers from (understandably) is a proliferation of templates, formats, and styles that have been added to in a very ad hoc way.  We have the opportunity here to try and get things right before we go too far down the track of creating a mess that becomes too large to fix later.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:25, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

 

== Using a footnote more than once ==

== Using a footnote more than once ==

Does anyone have a problem when they try to do this?  I tried it recently with the MiG-21, to use the same ref in three different sections, and I just could not get it to work.  I put the refs in exactly as I was supposed to, but it kept giving me static.  I finally just had to gave up.  Is there a problem, or did I just do it wrong somehow?--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 12:35, 8 November 2008 (EST)

Does anyone have a problem when they try to do this?  I tried it recently with the MiG-21, to use the same ref in three different sections, and I just could not get it to work.  I put the refs in exactly as I was supposed to, but it kept giving me static.  I finally just had to gave up.  Is there a problem, or did I just do it wrong somehow?--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 12:35, 8 November 2008 (EST)