On 8/10/07, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
If Wikipedia has a detailed article on a subject, with references, and there is also a paragraph about it in some incidental place, or in a general article on the topic, it seems reasonable that the paragraph could rely on the main article. For example, if in an article on art I need to refer to the date of an Italian prince, the Wikipedia article on the prince or the relevant section of the Italy article would seem a perfectly adequate source. I could repeat the reference to some general history of Italy every time, but I do not see what this adds for purpose of scholarship or user assistance.
If some complex article like "List of countries by size" is well referenced, relying on that article will be made through an internal link (over the claim or like "see [[List of countries by size]]"), but it is not a reference. If we assume that the article "List of countries by size" is generated using specific data for every country from their own websites, and you want to define that Italy is at the Nth place by size then it is not reasonable to copy all references.
If you need only to verify specific date inside of some other article, please repeat the source. A reader should know directly where did you find that information.
And if you really don't want to copy reference, please, don't add Wikipedia article between <ref></ref> because of two reasons: (1) Self-referring shouldn't be a part of any scientific paper (including encyclopedia) and (2) Wikipedia articles are *changeable* and you should refer only to unchangeable sources.