Would [note-1] at the bottom be a link to note 1 at the bottom, else if it's put in note 50 or something, that's more scrolling up and confusion.
On 9/5/07, FT2 ft2.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
How about enabling the render of [link.com] as <ref>[link.com]</ref>, only for mainspace articles. Then talk pages and project pages wouldn't be affected. It's only really a desired point or under significant discussion for articles anyway.
FT2
PS -- While we're on the subject of refs and URLs, one other wish I'll throw in the ring - that ref's can at a very basic level, cite other named refs as sources. A markup like this: <reflink name="blah" />, that renders anywhere as "[note X]". The reason's this: Suppose you have multiple cites of the same source - say cite#1 is page 17 of a source, cite 2 is page 27, cite 3 is page 45, etc, or different uses of the same source need different comments in the note. Then you have to repeat the actual source detail in each cite, completely.
What I'd like is to be able to do something really basic like this:
Widgets are a major part of the economy of Greenland.<ref name="doe">John Doe, ''A History Of Widgets'' (1998), Academic press.</ref> Widget manufacture is responsible for over 90% of the GNP<ref>See <reflink name="doe" /> page 97.</ref> and 47% of employment of adults.<ref>According to Jane Smith, ''Life in Greenland'', 48%, and according to Doe<reflink name="doe" /> 47%</ref> ....
And have it render:
Widgets are a major part of the economy of Greenland.<sup>[1]</sup> Widget manufacture is responsible for over 90% of the GNP<sup>[2]</sup> and 47% of employment of adults.<sup>[3]</sup>
1 - John Doe, ''A History Of Widgets'' (1998), Academic press. 2 - Source: [note 1] page 97. 3 - According to Jane Smith, ''Life in Greenland'', 48%, and according to Doe [note 1] 47%
At present each of footnotes 1-3 must independently contain the same duplicated cite info, or {{cite web}}. Allowing simply <reflink name="blah" />, rendered as "[note X]" with the correct note number, would allow something roughly similar to "ibid", referencing any other note (in the main text or another footnote) by number, without recursion.
FT2.
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of George Herbert Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 8:49 AM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Why are URLs numbered?
On 9/5/07, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
FT2 wrote:
- auto-render all [http://link.com] as <ref>http://link.com</ref>.
It's
not perfect but the information's the best there is and its consistent
in
style.
I like #3.
That seems reasonable to me---that's usually what people mean by the inline links anyway (an assertion that their link constitutes a reference). Of course someone should still come along and either: 1) expand them into a full citation (e.g. with {{cite web}}); or 2) determine that the link is not a reliable source, and either remove it or move it to the "external links" section. But we have to do that with links that are already in ref tags anyway.
-Mark
That will mangle attempts to do standard administrative history and link references in the context of an inline discussion on a talk or notice page, though...
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l