|From: Axel Boldt axelboldt@yahoo.com |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@nupedia.com |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com |Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 08:55:25 -0700 (PDT) | | |--- Vicki Rosenzweig vr@redbird.org wrote: | |> In general, I think this is a good use for Talk pages. | |I disagree: sources are a vital part of the article and should not be |hidden away in an area that most readers will never find. I think of |Talk as short term discussions aimed at improving an article, not as a |depository of meta information. If all Talk pages are deleted tomorrow, |the encyclopedia should still be self-contained and complete. | |Sources are extremely useful information; it's impossible to evaluate |material without sources. Why would we possibly hide that information |from readers? | |Axel |
If a book is heavily used, it should be listed under ==Further Reading==. Likewise, if a web site is important, it sould be given under ==External Links==. Depending on the value of the source, it could also be given in the test of the article itself, if it's that relevant.
On the other hand, it isn't a bad thing to list random, regular sources like the 1911 britannica on the talk page for guidance of future writers without being compulsive about it.