Forum:References on bottom

Index → Panopticon → References on bottom

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

Coul we put refrences(episode names) on the bottom of the page it would be less crowded and make a little more sense not that it doesn't make sense. Also the Star Wars wiki and Marvel database have in universe style can't we do that on this site?--The 10th Doctor 23:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I personally prefer the titles where they are now, myself. I never noticed them making anything crowded, plus it's a lot handier than having to scroll up and down the page repeatedly to find out episode names in relation to events. --Colleyd 04:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Woof

I don't think we should adopt the Footnote system, I agree with Colleyd it's a lot more handy and easier to follow to the pages they're referencing when the page link is right there.

Not to dismiss the Wookipedia out of hand I had a look, and it seems even busier (than our current format) (specifically I looked at Imperial I-class Star Destroyer. The marvel database page seemed to have a much more fluid approach to dealing with in/out of universe information.

Additionally footnotes are used in the out-of-universe (real world) pages see The Dark Dimension, where there is more import to have everything referenced using the footnote system. --Tangerineduel 14:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that that Star Destroyer page looked busier than it would had it had the sources italicised in brackets like we do, in fact I'd say that it looks less crowded due to the fact that the references are short and in superscript, meaning that they are easier to bypass. However, Colleyd has a fair point as well (about scrolling).

As a slightly different idea, I think that we should list the appearances and mentions at the bottom of the page in a Behind the Scenes section (apart from in the cases of ones where there are so many appearances that they are put into another page, obviously) as they often crowd up the infoboxes. Just a thought. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 14:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not in favour of putting the references at the bottom of the page. I always have to scroll down to find the source and then I lose my place. With the references being just next to the information, you don't have to look very far.

As for Ghelæ's idea, I'm also not a big fan. I think that the properly formatted infoboxes look neat enough for me [Raxacoricofallapatorian]] is a good example). -<Azes13 20:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on wth refrences on the bottom the article will be much neater and a little easier to understand not that's it's hard to understand it will just be easier and Azes 13 it doesn't take much time or muscle to scroll to the botton shesh.--The 10th Doctor 15:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

It actually does take a bit, especially when reading through you may just want to open the story article in another tab and then continue reading with the article, with the footnotes that makes it impossible.

There is also a logistical level to this discussion as well, it's not just the 10th Doctor article (or in fact any of the related articles) it's the whole site which gets affected.

Currently the system in place functions well, and as stated above the footnote system is used in {{real world}} articles to cite sources. --Tangerineduel 15:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I've just jumped into this place. I've mostly edited on the Star Wars Wiki in the past (in it's earlier days before the wiki knew more than I do, lol) and one of the things I did notice about this place is that the sources in the article seem to make the page look messier, in my opinion. — beeurd ^talk 20:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank You Beeurd! So let'd do it.--The 10th Doctor 22:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)