I doubt you can overcite anything.
I would consider this sufficiently cited, although I haven't checked the
reliability of the sites in question.
By the way, I recommend you put the protest website in the external links
section and not within the article. It sounds a little POV-ish to put
external links with a particular POV in an article. Besides, the Manual of
Style is pretty much against it.
Mgm
On 5/17/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Somewhat in response to Jimbo's post, I thought I'd offer an example
of an article I've been working on, which has a massive number of
footnotes. Pretty much every sentence in it I wrote with reference to
one website or another, so I footnoted them all. Perhaps I suspect
some of it is dodgy, so I prefer the source being explicitly stated.
Anyway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnac_stones
I would like to hear from people whether they consider this level of
footnoting excessive, about right, deficient etc. I believe that this
article may almost meet WP:V, if it wasn't for the fact that most of
the sources are amateur websites. The sentence about Kermarquer is
definitely Original Research, but I'm sure sooner or later I'll find a
source to back me up.
Steve
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l