[edit] References
Hello Daniel. I have been pretty busy recently, thus I haven't been editing much. Regarding resized or references in columns, WP:FOOT is what you want, specifically this subsection. A summary can be found at Help:Footnotes. Regarding quotes, is reference 13 in this section an example of what you mean? If so, then the <ref>...</ref> markup is used just as it would be for a reference, except the quote is included between the tags e.g. <ref>"This is an example" (Rockpocket, Wikipedia, 2007.)</ref> would give you this. [1]
- ^ "This is an example" (Rockpocket, Wikipedia, 2007.)
If there is another accepted way of doing it, I am not aware of it. Rockpocket 04:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- If information you want is linked from WP:FOOT. Specifically the Template:Reflist will make references small and/or in columns. It used to be done with markup until the template was created. Rockpocket 05:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ah yes. That is using the older referencing system explained at WP:FN3. Basically you can label the citation number ("ref label") to anything you want (hence the 1a), but you have to make sure it matches up with the number at the citation text itself ("note label"). That system is no longer recommended, since the new system matches them up automatically, but is still used on some older pages. Rockpocket 06:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Templates
I've reverted the addition of the "obnoxious" template to multiple articles; clearly it has no consensus for the insertion within articles, secondly it is not(typo fix [18:34]) standardized, thirdly it has no direct purpose nor is it actually compliant/backed by any policy (you'll have to do better then appending "per WP:NOT", etc). I'd advise you to get consensus to insert that template within articles, it is disputed. Matthew 17:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry no - you aren't a vigilante of Wikipedia - you say all of those things yet the discussion is still going on. When a page is nominated for deletion - do you delete the page first and delete the links to that page - no, that's absolute crap and you should know better.Daniel()Folsom |\T/|\C/|\U/|(Can you help me with my signature?) 17:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:Consensus - Your edit to pages insertting that templates is disputed, thus the onus is on you to get consensus for the template (the TfD will likely decide this). Matthew 17:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've not said anything of the such, please do not misrepresent my comments (WP:TALK#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable, "Don't misrepresent other people"). Matthew 17:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Articles for deletion has a clear defined process, your argument "by my logic" is a clear argumentum ad ignorantiam. When the edits you make to a page are disputed you get a consensus to implement them (etc). Addendum: I've no interest in chatting with you all evening - If you can get a consensus to implement your edits then do it.. if not we'll see what the outcome of the TfD is. Matthew 17:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Calling something "obnoxious" is obviously a bit hostile, and the template seemed to have something of a sneering tone. It's just not the sort of language appropriate to throw around in templates. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Response and further conversation on his talk page ɗάɳɪзɺʄʘḶʃŏɱ © A »block me 22:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
