[WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[FT2]

Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?

The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
field.

What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only
including <ref name="WHATEVER" /> and <references /> tags. As the cursor
moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box
below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited.

Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage?

FT2



On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo <stvrtg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki:
>
> '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of
> biology.<ref>Williams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural
> selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''.
> Princeton. "Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive
> importance in biology." p5</ref> It is the process whereby an organism
> becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].<ref>The ''Oxford Dictionary
> of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as "Any change in the structure or
> functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its
> environment".</ref> Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a
> characteristic which is especially important for an organism's
> survival.<ref>Both uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by
> King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of
> genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed.</ref> For example, the adaptation of
> horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast
> and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable
> population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully,
> that is, by [[natural selection]].
>
> The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline
> <refs> make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing
> persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of
> separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe -
> then at least carriage-returns - putting the <ref> on the next line -
> would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but
> the text can actually be readable in edit mode).
>
> Anyway, working on something unsourced like:
>
> In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the
> process of [[evolution]]  &mdash;wherein canonical [[organism]]s
> (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently
> within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed
> before the theory of evolution &mdash;Lamarck had made some
> groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. "Adaptation" in
> reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to
> the canonical form of the species &mdash; changes brought about by a
> process of [[natural selection]]. "Adaptation" in the context of
> biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection.
>
> -Stevertigo
> Sources available upon request.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>