abstract
| - I've lost track of the various places this has come up, but some of us have previously discussed how we can cite sources of information without interrupting the flow of an article's text. Derik has even experimented with some templates that could be used. Well, apparently the Wikimedia software has a built-in footnote mechanism, which I noticed somebody else using when I got back from my vacation. (But of course I've forgotten who it was and where they used it.) But anyway, here is the Wikipedia footnotes mechanism. It inserts subscripts in the text that link down to a list of references at the end of the article. I think this is probably unobtrusive enough for those of you who didn't like the idea of "breaking the fourth wall" by making citations in the article text. I recommend that we encourage use of this mechanism. Opinions? --Steve-o 18:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC) Frequently when reading this wiki, I ask myself, where did that info come from? Often, I'd like to go to the source and find out more info (i.e. curiosity). But I can't because there is no source listed, and I end up asking a question in the discussion page and getting ItsWalky mad at me. For example: Noble/Savage's article says that Silverbolt was to be the traitor, and Megatron would absorb his wolf parts. I am 1) interested in learning more about that, and 2) wondering if this information is even true. Without citing sources, crazy claims like that are left to faith. I don't know how anyone could possibly know that information. Is this information that can be looked up and verified, or is this something the author heard three years ago and decided to write down? How accurate can that be? A footnote system, as is used in the Wikipedia, would go along way to solving these problems. AND, it's not like it's hard to do, Insert a couple pieces of code, and say where you got that information from!! --Crockalley 11:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
|