[WikiEN-l] Is this overciting?

[maru dubshinki]

On 5/17/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at 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

You didn't cite in the intro the "exceptionally dense collection" claim. :)

But that's pretty good. Ideally, from my standpoint, those references
in the bottom would contain not just the source information, but the
actual quotes you were using, so one does not need to pore over the
article/long research paper/whatever.
For an example of what I sort of mean, see my [[Encyclopedia of the
Brethren of Purity]]:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_the_Brethren_of_Purity

~maru