Talk:Yakov Estrin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Chess Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-Importance on the importance scale.

[edit] inline references

Harvard referencing is an inline citation, see Wikipedia:Inline citation, which says "Harvard reference, i.e. (author, date), is the simplest way to cite sources not in the World Wide Web, by quoting these after the sentence." Bubba73 (talk), 00:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• True, and I generally wouldn't edit an article just to change citation style from Harvard to footnote/endnote. In this case I was adding a category also so I took the opportunity to use endnotes (but botched the edit a bit anyway). The main advantages of endnotes over Harvard referencing is that the endnotes are shorter and less obtrusive in the article, and Harvard referencing is unfamiliar to many readers. (Of course if they never see Harvard referencing in any articles it will always remain unfamiliar, so that's a good reason to use it too.) Harvard definitely has the edge if you need to cite several different sections of the same work at different places in the article, although the Harvard refs can be put in the endnotes also instead of directly in the text. I did not intend to suggest that the Harvard referencing format was not satisfactory. If you want to change the referencing style back to the Harvard referencing you originally used that's fine. Quale (talk) 06:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
• I forgot to also mention that one thing that I don't think looks very good is to mix Harvard references with footnnotes/endnotes, unless the endnotes are really discussion rather than just another type of reference. The fact that Harvard refs sometimes don't work well for web citations is a possible reason to use endnotes throughout. Quale (talk) 07:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to say I don't like Harvard referencing at all-- I think it looks very obtrusive having them in the text-- but I understand it is an acceptable format so I guess I'll have to get used to it:) I'd never really come across it on Wikipedia before I started working on chess articles. Pawnkingthree (talk) 10:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to change the references back, and I also think that a mixture of styles within an article doesn't look good, except that even I usually use the footnote style for a reference to a website.

Back when I wrote term papers in school we used Harvard referencing. The first reference I noticed in Wikipedia (a couple of years ago) was a Harvard reference on the IBM 360 computer. Bubba73 (talk), 14:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)