On 24 Jul 2010, at 23:01, Jakob wrote:
...to attract more then a little fraction of the
number of Wikipedia authors we need a clear mission and usable
software for this task - I seen neither the one nor the other.
I think focusing on Wikimedia's citation needs is the most promising, especially if
this is intended to be a WMF project.
As for mission -- yes -- let's talk about what problem we're trying to solve. Two
central ones come to mind:
1. Improve verifiability by making it possible to start with a source and verify all
claims made by referencing that source 
2. Make it easier for editors to give references, and readers to use them 
Are those the right problems? Are there others? 
To figure out what the right problems are, I think it would help to look at the pain
points -- and their solutions -- the hacks and proposals related to citations. Hacks
include plugins and templates people have made to make MediaWiki more citation-friendly.
Proposals include the ones on strategy wiki.
Anybody want to take a look through?
Some of the hacks and proposals are listed here:
Could you add other hacks, proposals, and conversations related to citations, if you know
 This can be done using backlinks.
 I think of this as "actionable references" -- we'd have to explain
exactly what the desirable qualities are. Adding to bilbiographic managers in one click is
one of mine. :)
 Other side-effects might be helping to identify what's highly cited in Wikipedia
(which would be interesting -- and might help prioritize Wikisource additions),
automatically adding quotes to Wikiquote, ...