This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Innisfree987 has added a "missing footnotes" maintenance tag to the article that seem redundant. Footnotes are not strictly required, and in an article with a single source, there's hardly any need - it's obvious which reference the content is based on. Would it improve the article if instead of listing the reference once we added a footnote with that same reference after every paragraph? I don't think so. If Innisfree987 disagrees, they are of course welcome to do just that instead of drive-by tagging. For now I'll remove the footnote tag. Huon (talk) 11:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the tag is redundant and I would not recommend that anyone go through blindly and add a footnote to every paragraph unless they have access to the book and speak German so that they can verify each assertion actually came from the book, rather than being something that still needs a source. I don't have those resources on either front, hence the purpose of a clean-up tag--the hope of alerting someone who might be able to do this properly (whether the page's original creator or a different editor). As for WP:MINREF, I'd have thought it goes without saying that a tag about citations means I do have questions about the assertions in the entry; it just seemed gratuitous to add [citation needed] to every one of them when there was a cleaner solution in a general note about citations. Innisfree987 (talk) 17:11, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
