This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
(1) MOS is an editing guideline. It is never mandatory.
(2) Actually read the section in MOS on refernces, with which I am very familiar. It most certainly does not say that "Notes" is a standard. It offers the choice of a number of options.
(3) "References" are a group of things which we are referring the reader to. "Informational notes" or "Explanatory notes" contain information or explanations which did not easily fit into the text; "Notes", "Citations" or "Footnotes" refer the reader to specific parts of a source which support the statements made in the article; "Bibliography" or "Sources" refer the reader to general sources, or make the citations more efficient by listing a source's complete information just once, so it can be referred to more easily; "Further reading" refers the reader to material that was not used in the making of the article but which may be to their benefit to read. These are all "references" and, frankly, the MOS advice to put "Further reading" in its own section is simply wrong, and clutters up the table of contents with irrelevant entries. Any reader who wants to know more about the subject is going to look in "References", and that is where "Further reading" should be.
(4) That said, I'm not going to attempt enforce the logic of this by changing the section, I'll simply retire from editing the article. I've removed it from my watchlist; it's all yours. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:46, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
