User:MrBill3/sb4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

sb4 is for demonstration of setting up references with notes, citations and bibliography. Please note all references and statistics are fictional and this expresses the views of this editor only.

Citation only[edit]

Some items are referenced with only a citation.[1] In some instances a long article may be cited several times, possibly specifying specific pages.[2] Usually for a journal article the whole article is cited.[2] Sometimes the page is specified.[3]

Notes with citation[edit]

Sometimes an explanatory note is used.[Note 1] Sometimes they may be useful.[Note 2] "There has been some controversy on the subject.[Note 3]

Bibliography[edit]

In articles covering topics that have been the subject of an entire book, that book may be cited often.[6] It may be useful to have such a book in a separate section of references, "Bibliography".[7] This might illuminate the book as a source for much of the article.[8] Or highlight the book as comprehensive on the topic.[9] If the topic of the article is covered by a chapter in a book it can also be listed in a bibliography.[10]

Discussion[edit]

To make these forms of citation work the parameter "ref=harv" must be added to the original citation or the citation in the bibliography.[Note 4] There are a number of ways to use the "ref=harv" parameter.[12] When using the "harvp" template inside ref brackets <ref></ref> a period must be placed to maintain consistency in the reference section.[13] Sometimes authors write more than one book or article on the topic in the same year.[10] A lower case letter added to the year can be used to distinguish the two books or articles.[14] Some articles go so far as to use more than one notes section.[15] This is rare.[Stats 1] While this may be useful in distinguishing clearly distinct sets of notes it is controversial.[2][5] Most WP editors do not find this amount of complexity valuable.[Stats 2] This may add to the large number of errors in references on WP.[18][Stats 3] A balance between providing complete and detailed reference information and maintaining consistency and readability is important.[20][21] It is also important to avoid overcite.[1][2][5][22] While adequate inline citations and detailed enough references are required for verification, the value of extensive references and notes is questionable.[23][Stats 4] Complete and well organized references are useful to readers who are interested in critically evaluating the topic and the WP article.[Note 5] Uniformity in references increases readability.[Note 6] References on WP can be complex.[27] Some find them very confusing.[22]

Summary[edit]

References are required for verification. Important items not mentioned include the isbn for books, doi for journal articles and url's (possibly archived) for references on the web.[28] For references that lack these tools for access it is necessary to include adequate detail to allow an editor or reader to find the reference.[18] Full name of author and publication, full title and date should be included.[29] Many references used on WP are not easily accessed.[Stats 5]

List defined references[edit]

List defined references separate the references from the text.[31]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Smith has found in WP explanatory notes are not usually necessary. Information of value to the article should be paraphrased and included in content, with a citation for verification.[4]
  2. ^ Jones expressed the opinion that moving more detailed discussion to notes maintains a concise article.[1]
  3. ^ "The use of explanatory notes is the hotly debated on WP talk pages."[5]
  4. ^ This creates an anchor and the short citation will link to the full citation.[11]
  5. ^ Complete and detailed references allow readers to independently verify the article and pursue further study.[25]
  6. ^ Brooks has urged the development of a system of consistent and detailed references to increase readability.[26]

Stats: A second notes section[edit]

  1. ^ 1 in 1,000,000 Wikipedia articles use 2 or more notes sections.[16]
  2. ^ 85% of WP editors find references to complex.[17]
  3. ^ 45% of Wikipedia articles have reference errors.[19]
  4. ^ 66% of Wikipedia readers don't look at references.[24]
  5. ^ 25% of references on WP require specialized skills or paid access to verify.[30]

Citations[edit]

  1. ^ a b c Jones, Frank (1 January 1988). "News on citations". Cite Mag. pp. 15–9.
  2. ^ a b c d Smith, D (1985). "Study of citations". Journal of Reference. 8 (2): 185–250.
  3. ^ Smith (1985), p. 188.
  4. ^ Smith (1985), pp. 215–7.
  5. ^ a b c Davis, Jean (1 September 2015). "To note or not". Inside References. Vol. 10, no. 2. pp. 3–10.
  6. ^ Brooks (1995), pp. 2–5.
  7. ^ Brooks (1995), pp. 18–25.
  8. ^ Brooks (1995), p. 42.
  9. ^ Brooks (1995), p. 45.
  10. ^ a b Brooks (1993), p. 32.
  11. ^ Brooks (1995), p. 180.
  12. ^ Brooks (1995), p. 65.
  13. ^ Brooks (1995a), p. 44.
  14. ^ Brooks (1995a), p. 48.
  15. ^ Bean (2015), p. 15.
  16. ^ Bean (2015), p. 180, see table one.
  17. ^ Bean (2015), p. 125.
  18. ^ a b Walisnky, Mark (2012). What's Wrong With Wikipedia. Los Angeles, CA: Bad Books. p. 16.
  19. ^ Bean (2015), p. 78.
  20. ^ Brooks (1995), p. 200.
  21. ^ Brooks (1995a), pp. 46–8.
  22. ^ a b Walisnky (2012), pp. 8–12.
  23. ^ Average, Joe (2 November 2009). "Citations, who needs them?". Daily Reader. Vol. 3, no. 5. pp. 6–9.
  24. ^ Bean (2015), p. 133.
  25. ^ Brooks (1995), pp. 87–9.
  26. ^ Brooks (1995a), pp. 45–8.
  27. ^ Brooks (1995), pp. 5–15.
    Brooks (1995a), pp. 30–3.
  28. ^ Brooks (1993), pp. 30 ff.
  29. ^ Brooks (1993), pp. 30–1.
  30. ^ Bean (2015), p. 92.
  31. ^ "National Register Information System". National Register of Historic Places. National Park Service. 9 July 2010.

Bibliography[edit]

  • Bean, Counter (2015). Citation Fact Book. Washington, DC: Detail Books.
  • Brooks, Stanley (1993). "On the Web". All About Citations. NY: OK Books. pp. 30–60.
  • Brooks, Stanley (1995). Citations in Wikipedia. NY: Good Books.
  • Brooks, Stanley (1995a). "Consistency". Details About Citations. NY: Good Books. pp. 40–9.

Further reading[edit]

  • Staley, Max (2017). "The Use of References on Wikipedia". In Brooks, Stanley; Harris, George (eds.). References in Modern Use. NY: Academic Books.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MrBill3/sb4&oldid=1091905496"