User:Chaosdruid/usefullinks/Gafa

User page Wikidashboard Articles Projects Cats Copyediting
MoS GA/FA Frequently used
templates Current events User boxes Suggested articles Awards and
barnstars Sandboxes

Links MoS pages MoS conversations GOCE GOCE conversations GA FA tools & links Articles to work on Copyediting and prose Others

GA FA

FAR conversation on citation styles (from Malleus' talk page)

FAR citation styles

Hi

I think I might be misinterpreting criterion 2c from the FAC.

I took it to mean that either footnotes or Harvard should be used in an article, not both. The problem is how I see the usage. The article I am having difficulty with uses <ref> for all its cites, but has cites such as <ref>Sammon, p. 211</ref>

I thought that these were incorrect, as they had commas and were a Harvard style ref, but it seems I may be mistaken. Any chance you can clarify with links to other discussions or your own experience? (I have already been pointed to Wikipedia talk:Featured article criteria/Archive 10#Clarification on 2c)

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 19:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

That's perfectly OK, a lot of editors don't like the citation templates and prefer to format manually. Ealdgyth does it somewhat like that, see Gerard (archbishop of York) for instance. I'd prefer to see either the year or the title included in the citation, as in "Owen 1983, p. 3", or as Ealdgyth does it, but so long as the style is consistent and there's no ambiguity as to what "Sammon, p. 211" is referring to there's no problem. The important point is that the citations all have a logical and consistent style, however that's achieved. Malleus Fatuorum 19:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I also had to query my use of a couple of templates, at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_articles#Citations, as I was uncertain as to how best to link the pages to the ref. - something I am still unsure of. It seems silly to have 30 refs to the same book listed separately under "References" when it is just the page numbers that are different. I started using the {{rp template but have run into a couple of instances where editors feel they are no good, or even detrimental. Chaosdruid (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I prefer the shortened refs format .. see WP:CITESHORT. That way you only repeat the huge bibliographical stuff in one spot at the bottom, but are able to specify exact page numbers. You can either do <ref>Author ''Short Title'' p. X</ref> or <ref>Author, p. X</ref> or <ref>Author (year), p. X</ref> Besides the examples above that Malleus mentioned, you can also see Maximian or Richard Hawes. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not that fond myself of the {{rp}} style of citations, but I can understand that some prefer it, and I've got no problem with that. One thing you have to learn Chaosdruid is that whatever you do here there will be someone jumping up and down shouting that you've done it wrong. Malleus Fatuorum 21:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

AKAIK there are 6 ways to give page numbers for books or long journal articles:

<ref>Author, p. X</ref> etc. forces readers to search manually for the work. IMO that's horrible.
<ref name=X></ref>{{rp|n}} has the risk that the ref name and the page number(s) are split by a careless editor.
Using different refs for different parts of the same work. Becomes unusable for both editors and readers if there many parts of the same work.
Wikipedia:Cite#List-defined_references with {{r}}, where each use of {{r}} links to a citation and also shows a page number (range) in the main text. Disadvantage: shows page number (range) in the main text. Advantage: gets the reader to the work in 1 click rather than 2.
{{Harv}} etc. Advantage: does not show page number (range) in the main text. Disadvantage: gets the reader to the work in 2 clicks rather than 1,and 2 more clicks back to the text; (I think) equivalent of a ref name= appears after the 1st click, and can be as long and obscure.
{{sfn}} etc. Advantage: does not show page number (range) in the main text; sorts page numbers in the same work so that each group of refs to the name page(s) appear as ^abcdef..., as in the output of <ref name=...> - while AFAIK {{Harv}} does not sort and group page numbers, and you get a longer list of "refs". Disadvantage: gets the reader to the work in 2 clicks rather than 1,and 2 more clicks back to the text; equivalent of a ref name= appears after the 1st click, and can be as long and obscure.

Are there other choices? --Philcha (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

PS If you want realistic examples, I used Wikipedia:Cite#List-defined_references with {{r}} at e.g. Phaeacius and {{sfn}} at Robert Rossen. --Philcha (talk) 22:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

PPS I current use Wikipedia:Cite#List-defined_references with {{r}}, as IMO the page numbers in the main text are not obstructive and this method uses fewer clicks; YYMV. This method also plays nicely with the basic <ref name=...>, which is most editors learn first, and avoids a mixing of citation methods, which Wikipedia:Cite does not like. --Philcha (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Notes on copyediting from Daicaregos

From WP:UKCOUNTIES#Grammar and layout checklist:

The lead should adequately summarize the content of the article. There should not be anything in the lead not mentioned in the rest of the article. (GA criteria)
Wikilinks should only be made if they are relevant to the context. Common words do not need wikilinking.
Dates should only be linked if they are relevant to the context. The linking of dates for the purpose of autoformatting is now deprecated.
Links within quotations should be avoided.
Logical quotation should be used, i.e. final punctuation belongs inside the quote marks only if the punctuation is part of the quote.
External links only belong in the external links section.
It is recommended not to specify the size of images, so that the size can be what readers specify in their user preferences.
Text should not be sandwiched between two level images. (GA criteria)
Left-aligned images should not be placed at the start of subsections.
Fair-use images need a fair use rationale. (GA criteria)
Images need succinct captions. (GA criteria)
An image caption should only end with a period if it forms a complete sentence. (GA criteria)
Statements that are likely to be challenged and statistics need inline citations. (GA criteria)
Book references need the author, publishing date and page number. (GA criteria)
Book references preferably should include the publisher and ISBN.
Web references need the author, publisher, publishing date and access date. (GA criteria)
Web references preferably should include the language (if not English) and format (if not HTTP).
References should be consistently formatted, eg. consistent author naming, abbreviations for "page number", etc.
Blogs and personal websites are not reliable sources, unless written by the subject of the article or by an expert on the subject. (GA criteria)
Dead web references should not be removed until they can be replaced.
Inline citations belong immediately after punctuation marks. (GA criteria)
"Further info" links belong at the top of sections. (GA criteria)
Portal links belong in the "See also" section. (GA criteria)
Wikicommons and Wikinews links belong in the external links section. (GA criteria)
Lists should only be included if they can't be made into prose or their own article. Listy prose should be avoided. (GA criteria)
Rather than hyphens, en dashes should be used for ranges, eg. 5–10 years, and unspaced em dashes or spaced en dashes should be used for punctuation, eg. The building—now disused—was built in 1820. Their codes are "–" and "—".
Page ranges in the footnotes, and sports scores should use en dashes rather than hyphens.
" " (non-breaking space) should be typed between numbers and abbreviated units, and other numerical/non-numerical components, e.g., "10 kg", "Boeing 747"
Imperial measurements should be accompanied by the metric equivalent in brackets, and vice versa. A conversion template can be used, eg. {{convert|5|mi|km|0}}.
Whole numbers under 10 should be spelled out as words, except when in lists, tables or infoboxes.
Sentences should not start with a numeral. The sentence should be recast or the number should be spelled out.
Only the first word in a section heading needs a capital letter (except in proper nouns).
Short sections and paragraphs are discouraged. (GA criteria)
Ampersands should not be used within prose, except when part of a name, eg., Marks & Spencer.
"Last few years" has ambiguous meaning; "past few years" is preferable in some contexts.
"Within" has a different meaning to "in". "Within" should only be used when emphasising that something is inside something, eg. "the town is in the county", "the town is within the county boundaries".
Compound adjectives should be hyphenated to reduce ambiguity, e,g., "light-blue car".
Hyphens aren't used after -ly adverbs as the meaning isn't ambiguous, e,g., "brightly coloured car".
"Century" doesn't need a capital, e.g., "15th century" rather than "15th Century"
"While" should only be used when emphasising that two events occur at the same time, or when emphasising contrast. It shouldn't be used as an additive link.
Using "with" as an additive link leads to wordy and awkward prose, e.g. "the town has ten councillors, with one being the district mayor" → "the town has ten councillors; one is the district mayor"
Beginning a sentence with "there", when "there" doesn't stand for anything, leads to wordy prose, e.g. There are ten houses in the village → Ten houses are in the village. The same applies to "it".
The words "current", "recent" & "to date" should be avoided as they become outdated. (GA criteria)
Avoid using "not" unnecessarily, eg. "songs previously not heard" → "songs previously unheard"
Contractions shouldn't be used, such as "can’t", "he's" or "they're".
Avoid weasel words, such as "it is believed that", "is widely regarded as", "some have claimed". (GA criteria)
Avoid peacock terms, such as "beautiful", "famous", "popular", "well-known", "significant", "important" and "obvious". (GA criteria)
Avoid vague words, such as "various", "many", "several", "long", "a number of", "just", "very" and "almost".
Avoid using overly formal words or wordy phrases, such as "utilise", "whilst", "upon", "commence", "the majority of", "whereas", "generate", "due to the fact that" and "prior to".
Avoid phrases with redundant words, such as "is located in", "the two are both", "they brought along", "they have plans to", "they were all part of", "the last ones to form", "both the towns", "outside of the town", "all of the towns", "received some donations", "still exists today", "it also includes others", "many different towns", "near to the town", "available records show", "to help limit the chance", "christian church", "in order to", "first began", "joined together", "future plans" and "in the year 2007".