Daniel Ehrenberg wrote:
Currently, we have almost no references (I would estimate 1 in 50 articles have references). To require citations on all of them would be ridiculous.
Why? Notice how 1911EB has a little para of refs glued onto the end of each article, and they're not much noticed, but their length is easier to see if you turn into bulleted list. Modern "real" encyclopedias have refs on every article too, in very small print typically.
Lack of refs is just another way for an article to be incomplete. Adding refs is more complicated than it needs to be however, and I've been designing a scheme to make it easier by using a new namespace a la images.
Stan
I have no problem whatsoever in having a list of references at the end of the article. I must not have understood what was being proposed. The original proposal sounded as if the requester wanted a citation next to each assertion. That I would oppose.
RickK
Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote: Daniel Ehrenberg wrote:
Currently, we have almost no references (I would estimate 1 in 50 articles have references). To require citations on all of them would be ridiculous.
Why? Notice how 1911EB has a little para of refs glued onto the end of each article, and they're not much noticed, but their length is easier to see if you turn into bulleted list. Modern "real" encyclopedias have refs on every article too, in very small print typically.
Lack of refs is just another way for an article to be incomplete. Adding refs is more complicated than it needs to be however, and I've been designing a scheme to make it easier by using a new namespace a la images.
Stan
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004, Stan Shebs wrote:
Daniel Ehrenberg wrote:
Currently, we have almost no references (I would estimate 1 in 50 articles have references). To require citations on all of them would be ridiculous.
Why? Notice how 1911EB has a little para of refs glued onto the end of each article, and they're not much noticed, but their length is easier to see if you turn into bulleted list. Modern "real" encyclopedias have refs on every article too, in very small print typically.
Lack of refs is just another way for an article to be incomplete. Adding refs is more complicated than it needs to be however, and I've been designing a scheme to make it easier by using a new namespace a la images.
This is exactly what I had in mind: each article in Wikipedia *should* have a number of entries of print materials under the "References" section, especially of authors referred to in the article body. (For example, if the article quotes one John Schmuck as saying, "This theory stinks", then there should be a proper citation to the print source whence Schmuck's quotation came.) However, I also acknowlege that it is possible that certain topics probably don't lend themselves to a Reference section.
I think it would be desireable for articles to also have links to relevant webpages, but due to the ephemeral nature of most web pages -- & the widely uneven quality of most material on the web -- I acknowledge that this resource won't be as widespread.
Geoff