Wikipedia:Verifiability
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To discuss particular sources, see the reliable sources noticeboard. For vandalism, see WP:VAND. This page documents an English Wikipedia policy, a widely accepted standard that all editors should normally follow. Changes made to it should reflect consensus. Shortcuts:
WP:V
WP:VERIFY
WP:SOURCE

This page in a nutshell: All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.
The Five Pillars
Core content policies
Neutral point of view
No original research
Verifiability
Other content polices
Article titles
Biographies of living persons
What Wikipedia is not


The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth; that is, whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true.

To show that it is not original research, all material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source. But in practice not everything need actually be attributed. This policy requires that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed to a reliable, published source in the form of an inline citation, and that the source directly support the material in question.[1]

This policy is strictly applied to all material in the mainspace—articles, lists, sections of articles, and captions—without exception, and in particular to material about living persons. Anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed, and unsourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. For how to write citations, see Citing sources.

Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies, along with No original research and Neutral point of view. These policies jointly determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in articles. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should familiarize themselves with the key points of all three.Contents [hide]
1 Reliable sources and other principles
1.1 Reliable sources and notability
1.2 Reliable sources and neutrality
1.3 Reliable sources and original research
2 When a reliable source is required
2.1 Anything challenged or likely to be challenged
2.2 Burden of evidence
3 Reliable sources
3.1 What counts as a reliable source
3.2 Newspaper and magazine blogs
3.3 Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS
4 Sources that are usually not reliable
4.1 Questionable sources
4.2 Self-published sources
4.3 Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves
5 Accessibility
5.1 Access to sources
5.2 Non-English sources
6 Other issues
6.1 Tagging a sentence, section, or article
6.2 Exceptional claims require exceptional sources
6.3 Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it
7 See also
8 Notes
9 Further reading

Reliable sources and other principles
Reliable sources and notability
Further information: Wikipedia:Notability

If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.
Reliable sources and neutrality
Further information: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

All articles must adhere to the Neutral point of view policy (NPOV), fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. Where there is disagreement between sources, use in-text attribution: "John Smith argues that X, while Paul Jones maintains that Y," followed by an inline citation. Sources themselves are not required to maintain a neutral point of view; indeed most reliable sources are not neutral. Our job as editors is simply to present what the reliable sources say.
Reliable sources and original research
Further information: Wikipedia:No original research

The No original research policy (NOR) has three requirements relevant to the Verifiability policy:
All material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source. This means that a source must exist for it, whether or not it is cited in the article. Wikipedia must never be a first publisher.
Sources must support the material clearly and directly: drawing inferences from multiple sources to advance a novel position—called original synthesis, or original SYN—is prohibited by the NOR policy.[2]
Articles should be based largely on reliable secondary sources. While primary sources are normally welcome, there are dangers in relying on them. For more information, see the Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources section of the NOR policy, and the Misuse of primary sources section of the BLP policy.
When a reliable source is required

Anything challenged or likely to be challengedPolicy shortcuts:
WP:CHALLENGE
WP:CHALLENGED


This policy requires that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation. The source should be cited clearly and precisely, with page numbers where appropriate. Be mindful of copyright: do not copy text from copyrighted sources except when directly quoting the material, or paraphrase too closely; when paraphrasing or using direct quotes, in-text attribution is required.[3]
Burden of evidencePolicy shortcuts:
WP:BOP
WP:BURDEN
WP:ONUS
WP:PROVEIT
WP:UNSOURCED


The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed. How quickly this should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article. Editors might object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. It has always been good practice to make reasonable efforts to find sources yourself that support such material, and cite them. Do not leave unsourced or poorly sourced material in an article if it might damage the reputation of living persons or organizations, and do not move it to the talk page.[4]
Reliable sourcesPolicy shortcut:
WP:SOURCES

What counts as a reliable source

The word "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings: the piece of work itself (a document, article, paper, or book), the creator of the work (for example, the writer), and the publisher of the work (for example, The New York Times). All three can affect reliability.

Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should directly support the material presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source.

Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. But they are not the only reliable sources in such areas. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also be used, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include university-level textbooks, books published by respected publishing houses, magazines, journals, and mainstream newspapers. Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria.
Newspaper and magazine blogsPolicy shortcut:
WP:NEWSBLOG


Several newspapers host columns that they call blogs. These are acceptable as sources, so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. In March 2010, the Press Complaints Commission in the UK ruled that journalists' blogs hosted on the websites of newspapers or magazines are subject to the same standards expected of comment pieces in that organization's print editions.[5] Where a news organization publishes an opinion piece, the writer should be attributed (e.g. "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers may never be used as sources. For blogs that are not reliable sources, see below.
Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS
Further information: Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources

To discuss the reliability of a specific source for a particular statement, consult the reliable sources noticeboard, which seeks to apply this policy to particular cases. For a guideline discussing the reliability of particular types of sources, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (WP:IRS). In the case of inconsistency between this policy and the WP:IRS guideline, or any other guideline related to sourcing, the policy has priority.
Sources that are usually not reliablePolicy shortcuts:
WP:NOTRELIABLE
WP:NOTRS
WP:QS

Questionable sources

Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional, or which rely heavily on rumor and personal opinion. Questionable sources should be used only as sources of material on themselves, especially in articles about themselves; see below. They are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties.

Self-published sourcesPolicy shortcuts:
WP:SPS
WP:SELFPUBLISH
WP:BLOGS
WP:TWITTER

Further information: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid self-published sources

Anyone can create a personal web page or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, one should take care when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.

Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.

Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselvesPolicy shortcuts:
WP:ABOUTSELF
WP:SELFANDQUEST
WP:SELFPUB
WP:SELFQUEST


Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the requirement in the case of self-published sources that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
the material is not unduly self-serving;
it does not involve claims about third parties;
it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
the article is not based primarily on such sources.
Accessibility
Access to sourcesPolicy shortcuts:
WP:PAYWALL
WP:SOURCEACCESS

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange

Verifiability in this context means that anyone should be able to check that material in a Wikipedia article has already been published by a reliable source. The principle of verifiability implies nothing about ease of access to sources: some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may be available only in university libraries. WikiProject Resource Exchange may be able to assist in obtaining source material.
Non-English sourcesPolicy shortcuts:
WP:NOENG
WP:NONENG
WP:RSUE
WP:VUE


Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones, provided that English sources of equal quality and relevance are available. When quoting a source in a different language, provide both the original-language text and an English translation in the text or a footnote. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations by Wikipedians, but translations by Wikipedians are preferred over machine translations. When citing such a source without quoting it, the original and its translation should be provided if requested by other editors: this can be added to a footnote or the talk page. When posting original source material, editors should be careful not to violate copyright; see the fair-use guideline.
Other issues
Tagging a sentence, section, or article
Further information: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles

If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider tagging a sentence with the {{citation needed}} template by writing {{cn}} or {{fact}}. Other templates are available here for tagging sections or entire articles. Alternatively, leave a note on the talk page requesting a source, or move the material there. To request verification that a reference supports the text, tag it with {{verification needed}}. Material that fails verification may be tagged with {{failed verification}} or removed. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately and not tagged or moved to the talk page.
Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcesPolicy shortcut:
WP:REDFLAG

See also: Wikipedia:Fringe theories

Exceptional claims require high-quality sources.[6] Red flags that should prompt extra caution include:
surprising or apparently important claims not covered by mainstream sources;
reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, or against an interest they had previously defended;
claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community, or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions, especially in science, medicine, history, politics, and biographies of living persons. This is especially true when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.
Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use itPolicy shortcut:
WP:CIRCULAR


Articles on Wikipedia or on websites that mirror its content should not be used as sources, because this would amount to self-reference. Similarly, editors should not use sources that present material originating from Wikipedia to support that same material in Wikipedia, as this would create circular sourcing—Wikipedia citing a source that derives its material from Wikipedia. Wikipedia may be cited with caution as a primary source of information on itself, such as in articles about itself.
See also
Listen to this page (info/dl)


This audio file was created from a revision of Verifiability dated 2006-12-04, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the page. (Audio help)
More spoken pages
Wikipedia:Citation clutter, an essay
Wikipedia:Core content policies, an essay
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine), a guideline
Wikipedia:List of free online resources
Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles
Wikipedia:When to cite, an essay
WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
WikiProject Resource Exchange
Argument from authority
Notes
^ See the discussion about sources in WP:NOR that describes summarizing materials in your own words, leaving nothing implied that goes beyond the sources.
^ When there is dispute about whether a piece of text is fully supported by a given source, direct quotes and other relevant details from the source should be provided to other editors as a courtesy.
^ Editors are encouraged to read the sources, understand them, internalise them, then give a balanced summary of what the sources say in the editor's own words.
^ Wales, Jimmy (16 May 2006). "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information". WikiEN-l. Wikimedia. "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons."
^ Plunkett, John (29 March 2010). "Rod Liddle censured by the PCC". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 November 2010.
^ Hume, David (1984) [1748]. An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Forgotten Books. p. 86. ISBN 978-1153586047. "That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish; and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the superior only gives us an assurance suitable to that degree of force, which remains, after deducting the inferior."
Further reading
Wales, Jimmy (19 July 2006). "Insist on sources". WikiEN-l. Wikimedia. "I really want to encourage a much stronger culture which says: it is better to have no information, than to have information like this, with no sources."

[hide]
v · d · e
Key Wikipedia policies and guidelines

Overview Five pillars · Policies and guidelines · List of policies and guidelines (Summary list of policies · Summary list of guidelines)

Project-wide principles What Wikipedia is not · Editing policy · Consensus · Dispute resolution · Ignore all rules

Article standards policies Neutral point of view · Verifiability · No original research · Biographies of living persons · Article titles · Deletion

Behavioral policies Child protection · Civility · Edit warring · No personal attacks · No legal threats · Ownership of articles · Sock-puppetry

Behavioral guidelines Assume good faith · Etiquette · Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point · Please do not bite the newcomers · Gaming the system

Classification guidelines Categories, lists, and navigation templates · Categorization · Template namespace

Content guidelines Conflict of interest · Do not include copies of primary sources · Disambiguation · Do not create hoaxes · Notability · Patent nonsense · Identifying reliable sources

Editing guidelines Article size · Be bold · Hatnotes · Signatures · Talk page guidelines · User pages · Subpages

Style conventions Manual of Style · Manual of Style (accessibility) · Manual of Style (dates and numbers) · Manual of Style (layout) · Manual of Style (lists) · Manual of Style (linking)

Policies · Guidelines


Categories: Wikipedia policy | Wikipedia content policy | Wikipedia verifiability
Log in / create account
Project page
Discussion
Read
View source
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
বাংলা
Български
Català
Česky
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
ქართული
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
‪Norsk (bokmål)‬
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Sicilianu
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
کوردی
Српски / Srpski
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
ייִדיש
中文
This page was last modified on 5 March 2011 at 17:10.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers

Wikipedia:Citing sources
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:CITE)

WP:REF redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Reference Desk. This page documents an English Wikipedia content guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. Shortcuts:
WP:CITE
WP:REF

This page in a nutshell: This guideline discusses how to format citations. For the policy on sourcing, see Verifiability.


A citation is a line of text that uniquely identifies a source. For example:
Ritter, Ron. The Oxford Style Manual. Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 1.


When and why to cite sources: The policy on sourcing is Verifiability. This requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations. The policy is strictly applied to all material in the mainspace—articles, lists, captions, and sections of articles—without exception. In the event of a contradiction between this page and the policy, the policy takes priority, and this page should be updated to reflect it. Sourcing also applies to images: when an image is uploaded, the uploader must say where the image came from and indicate its copyright status.

How to write citations: Each article should use the same citation method throughout. If an article already has citations, adopt the method in use or seek consensus on the talk page before changing it. While you should try to write citations correctly, what matters is that you provide enough information to identify the source. Others will improve the formatting if needed.Wikipedia guidelines
Behavioral

Assume good faith
Conflict of interest
Don't bite the newbies
Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point
Etiquette
Gaming the system
User pages
Content

Citing sources
Identifying reliable sources
Notability
Discussion

Signatures
Talk page guidelines
Editing

Article size
Be bold
Don't add the full text of primary sources
Don't create hoaxes
Edit summary
Patent nonsense
Organization

Categories, lists, and templates
Categorization
Disambiguation
Subpages
Style

Manual of Style
Manual of Style (lists)
Manual of Style (tables)
More
List of policies and guidelines
Contents [hide]
1 Use of terms
2 How to format and place citations
2.1 Inline citations
2.2 A quick how-to
2.3 Footnotes
2.3.1 Shortened footnotes
2.3.2 List-defined references
2.4 Parenthetical referencing
2.5 Text-source integrity
2.6 Bundling citations
3 In-text attribution
4 Dealing with unsourced material
5 Some general advice
5.1 When and why to cite sources
5.2 Say where you read it
5.3 Non-English sources
5.4 Convenience links
5.5 Multimedia
5.6 Avoid scrolling lists
5.7 General reference
5.8 Embedded links
5.9 Further reading/External links
6 What information to include
6.1 Citation styles and consistency
6.2 Style variation
6.3 Examples
6.3.1 Books
6.3.2 Journal articles
6.3.3 Newspaper articles
6.3.4 Webpages
6.4 Identifying parts of a source
6.5 Links and ID numbers
7 Citation templates and tools
7.1 Metadata
7.2 Citation processing tools
7.3 Programming tools
7.4 Citation export tools
8 Preventing and repairing dead links
9 See also
10 Notes
11 References
12 Further reading

Use of terms
A "citation" is a line of text that identifies a source; for example, Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, 1971, p. 1.
"Source" has three meanings on Wikipedia: the piece of work itself (e.g. A Theory of Justice); the writer or creator of the work (e.g. John Rawls); or the publisher of the work (e.g. Harvard University Press). How reliable a source is can depend on just one of these factors, or on all three.[1]
"Reference" may refer to the citation or to the source.
How to format and place citations
Inline citations
Shortcut:
WP:INCITE


An inline citation is a line of text identifying a source that is added close to the material it supports, offering text-source integrity. If a word or phrase is particularly contentious, an inline citation may be added next to it within a sentence, but adding the citation to the end of the sentence or paragraph is usually sufficient, so long as it is clear which source supports which part of the text. Editors are free to use any method for inline citations; no method is recommended over any other. Two common styles of inline citation used on Wikipedia are clickable footnotes ( tags) and parenthetical references.
A quick how-to

Most editors add inline citations inside footnotes; see below for more details. One easy way to write them is to add this to the end of the relevant phrase, sentence, or paragraph:Rawls, John. ''A Theory of Justice''. Harvard University Press, 1971, p. 1.
Sanger, David E. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/world/24prexy.html?_r=1&hp "With Warning, Obama Presses China on Currency"], ''The New York Times'', September 23, 2010, accessed October 31, 2010.


Then add this to the end of the article:
==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

Footnotes
Further information: Wikipedia:Footnotes and Help:Footnotes
Shortcut:
WP:CITEFOOT


"Footnote" and "note" are used interchangeably to refer to citations and commentary placed between ref tags, so that they appear at the end of the article under a Notes or References section heading; the term "endnote" is not used on Wikipedia.

Most Wikipedia articles place their citations in footnotes. These appear as clickable numbers within the text, which link to a numbered list of full citations at the end of the article. The citations will appear at the end of the article if you type {{Reflist}}.[2] This will generate the list of footnotes. This is usually called the Notes or References section.

For a citation to appear in a footnote, it must be enclosed within "ref" tags. You can add these by typing at the front of the citation and at the end. Alternatively use the list of "markup" in the edit box, which includes . You can also use the name attribute by using details of the citation. Thereafter, the same footnote may be used multiple times by adding . If the name contains an embedded blank space, you must either add straight quotation marks () or replace the unacceptable blank space with an acceptable symbol such as an underscore or a hyphen (e.g., or ), thus eliminating the need for quotation marks.

This is how it looks in the edit box:

The sun is pretty big,Miller, Edward. ''The Sun''. Academic Press, 2005, p. 1. but the moon is not so big.Brown, Rebecca. "Size of the Moon," ''Scientific American'', 51(78):46. The sun is also quite hot.Smith, John. ''The Sun's Heat''. Academic Press, 2005, p. 2.

==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

This is how it looks in the article:

The sun is pretty big,[1] but the moon is not so big.[2] The sun is also quite hot.[3]

Notes
^ Miller, Edward. The Sun. Academic Press, 2005, p. 1.
^ Brown, Rebecca. "Size of the Moon," Scientific American, 51(78):46.
^ Smith, John. The Sun's Heat. Academic Press, 2005, p. 2.
Shortened footnotes
Shortcut:
WP:CITESHORT


Many articles use short citations in footnotes, giving the author, year, and page number, such as Smith 2010, p. 1. As before, the list of footnotes is automatically generated in a "Notes" or "Footnotes" section. A full citation is then added in a "References" section. Short citations can be written manually, or by using the {{sfn}} or {{harvnb}} templates. (Note that templates should not be added without consensus to an article that already uses a consistent referencing style.) The short and full citations may be linked so that the reader can click on the short note to highlight the full citation. See the template documentation for details and solutions to common problems. For variations with and without templates, see wikilinks to full references. For a set of realistic examples, see these.

This is how short citations look in the edit box:

The sun is pretty big,Miller 2005, p. 1. but the moon is not so big.Brown 2006, p. 2. The sun is also quite hot.Miller 2005, p. 3.

== Notes ==
{{Reflist}}

== References ==
*Brown, Rebecca (2006). "Size of the Moon," ''Scientific American'', 51(78).
*Miller, Edward (2005). ''The Sun''. Academic Press.

This is how they look in the article:

The sun is pretty big,[1] but the moon is not so big.[2] The sun is also quite hot.[3]

Notes
^ Miller 2005, p. 23.
^ Brown 2006, p. 46.
^ Miller 2005, p. 34.


References
Brown, Rebecca (2006). "Size of the Moon", Scientific American, 51(78).
Miller, Edward (2005). The Sun. Academic Press.

Shortened notes using titles rather than publication dates would look like this in the article:

Notes
^ Miller, The Sun, p. 23.
^ Brown, "Size of the Moon", p. 46.
^ Miller, The Sun, p. 34.
List-defined references
Further information: Help:Footnotes#List-defined references and WP:LDR

As of September 2009, the Cite.php extension was modified to support list-defined references. These can be implemented with the |refs= parameter to the {{Reflist}} template, or by using a pair of HTML tags ( and ) in place of the tag. These reduce clutter within articles, by putting all the citation details in the section at the end where the footnotes are displayed. Defined references must be used within the body; unused references will show an error message. Non-list-defined references (ordinary footnote references enclosed with and tags) will display as normal along with list-defined ones. As with other citation formats, list-defined references should not be added to articles that already have a stable referencing system, unless there is consensus to do so. When in doubt, use the referencing system added by the first major contributor to use a consistent style.

This is how it looks in the edit box::

The Sun is pretty big, but the Moon is not so big. The Sun is also quite hot.

==References==
{{Reflist|refs=
Miller, Edward.''The Sun''. Academic Press, 2005, p. 23.
Miller, Edward.''The Sun''. Academic Press, 2005, p. 34.
Brown, Rebecca. "Size of the Moon," ''Scientific American,'' 51(78):46
}}

This is how it looks in the article:

The Sun is pretty big,[1] but the Moon is not so big.[2] The Sun is also quite hot.[3]

References
^ Miller, Edward. The Sun. Academic Press, 2005, p. 23.
^ Brown, Rebecca. "Size of the Moon," Scientific American, 51(78):46.
^ Miller, Edward. The Sun. Academic Press, 2005, p. 34.
Parenthetical referencing
Further information: Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing

In parenthetical referencing, a short citation, such as (Smith 2010, p. 1), is added in parentheses (round brackets) just after the point it is supporting. Several forms of parenthetical referencing are used in Wikipedia, including author-date referencing (APA style, Harvard style, or Chicago style), and author-title or author-page referencing (MLA style or Chicago style). The full citation (Smith, John. Name of Book. Cambridge University Press, 2010) is then added in alphabetical order, according to the authors' surnames, at the end of the article in a "References" section. The inline and full citation may be linked using a template (see linking inline and full citations); as with other citation templates, these should not be added to articles without consensus.

This is how it looks in the edit box:

The Sun is pretty big (Miller 2005, p. 1), but the Moon is not so big (Brown 2006, p. 2). The Sun is also quite hot (Miller 2005, p. 3).
== References ==
*Brown, R (2006). "Size of the Moon", ''Scientific American'', 51(78).
*Miller, E (2005). ''The Sun'', Academic Press.

This is how it looks in the article:

The Sun is pretty big (Miller 2005, p. 1), but the Moon is not so big (Brown 2006, p. 2). The Sun is also quite hot (Miller 2005, p. 3).

References
Brown, R (2006). "Size of the Moon", Scientific American, 51(78).
Miller, E (2005). The Sun, Academic Press.
Text-source integrity
Shortcut:
WP:INTEGRITY


When using inline citations, it is important to maintain text-source integrity. The point of an inline citation is to allow readers and other editors to check that the material is sourced; that point is lost if the citation is not clearly placed. The distance between material and its source is a matter of editorial judgment, but adding text without placing its source clearly can lead to allegations of original research, violations of the sourcing policy, and even plagiarism. Editors should exercise caution when rearranging or inserting material to ensure that text-source relationships are maintained.

The following inline citation, for example, is not helpful, because the reader does not know whether each source supports the material; each source supports part of it; or just one source supports it with the others added as further reading:
Delia Smith is the UK's best-selling cookery writer.[3][4][5][6]


Where you are using multiple sources for one sentence, consider bundling citations at the end of the sentence or paragraph with an explanation in the footnote regarding which source supports which point; see below for how to do that.
Bundling citations
Shortcuts:
WP:CITEBUNDLE
WP:Bundling

Further information: Wikipedia:Citation overkill

You can combine or "bundle" citations between one set of ref tags at the end of a sentence or paragraph, along with an explanation in the footnote for which source supports which part of the text. Citation bundling can be done with long or short footnotes, with or without citation templates. It has multiple benefits:
it helps readers and other editors see at a glance which source supports which point, maintaining text-source integrity;
it avoids the visual clutter of multiple clickable footnotes inside a sentence or paragraph;
it avoids the confusion of having multiple sources listed separately after sentences, with no indication of which source to check for each part of the text, such as this.[7][8][9][10]
it makes it less likely that inline citations will be moved inadvertently when text is re-arranged, because the footnote states clearly which source supports which point.

A simple example of citation bundling:

The sun is pretty big, but the moon is not so big. The sun is also quite hot.[1]

Notes
^ For the sun's size, see Miller, Edward. The Sun. Academic Press, 2005, p. 1.
For the moon's size, see Brown, Rebecca. "Size of the Moon," Scientific American, 51(78):46.
For the sun's heat, see Smith, John. The Sun's Heat. Academic Press, 2005, p. 2.
In-text attribution
Shortcut:
WP:INTEXT


In-text attribution is the attribution inside a sentence of material to its source, in addition to an inline citation in a footnote after the sentence. For example:
John Rawls argues that, to reach a fair decision, parties must consider the matter as if behind a veil of ignorance.[11]


An inline citation should follow the attribution, either after the phrase, sentence, or paragraph in question. In-text attribution should be used with direct speech (a source's words between quotation marks); indirect speech (a source's words without quotation marks); and close paraphrasing. It can also be used, optionally, when summarizing a source's position in your own words. Using in-text attribution avoids inadvertent plagiarism, and also helps to orient the reader as to where the position is coming from. It is therefore often a helpful thing to add, though caution is required to make sure the attribution does not lead to an inadvertent neutrality violation. For example:
Professor John Smith argues that human-caused increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide have led to global warming, though Professor Susan Jones maintains that Smith has misread the data.


In some contexts this sentence could mislead, because it implies parity between the sources, and that Smith may be the only person holding his position, whereas his view is held by the majority of climatologists. This kind of issue can be fixed by writing "Professor John Smith, for example, argues..." or "Professor John Smith, following the majority view, argues..." Neutrality issues apart, there are other ways in-text attribution can mislead. The sentence below suggests that The New York Times has alone made this important discovery:
According to The New York Times, the sun will set in the west this evening.


Simple facts such as this can have inline citations to reliable sources as an aid to the reader, but normally the text itself is best left as a plain statement without in-text attribution:
By mass, oxygen is the third most abundant element in the universe after hydrogen and helium.[12]

Dealing with unsourced material
Shortcut:
WP:NOCITE


If an article is unreferenced you can tag it with the template {{Unreferenced}}, so long as it is not nonsensical or a biography of a living person, in which case request admin assistance.
If a claim is doubtful but not harmful, use the {{fact}} tag, which will add "citation needed," but remember to go back and remove the claim if no source is produced within a reasonable time.
If a claim is doubtful and harmful, remove it from the article. You may want to move it to the talk page and ask for a source, unless it is very harmful or absurd, in which case it should not be posted to the talk page either. Use your common sense.
All unsourced and poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed from articles and talk pages immediately. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Libel.
Some general advice
When and why to cite sources
Cite sources when
adding or restoring material that is challenged or likely to be challenged,
quoting someone, with or without quotation marks, or closely paraphasing a source,
summarizing source material in your own words, in order to give credit to the source of your ideas,
uploading an image.
Citing sources
ensures that content can be checked by any reader or editor, which improves the credibility of Wikipedia,
shows that your edit is not original research, plagiarism, or a copyright violation,
ensures that material about living persons complies with the biography of living persons policy,
helps readers find additional information.
Say where you read it

Shortcuts:
WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT
WP:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT


Don't cite a source unless you've seen it for yourself. Where you want to cite John Smith, but you've only read Paul Jones who cites Smith, write it like this (this formatting is just an example; there are several ways this can be written):
Smith, John. Name of Book I Haven't Seen, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 1, cited in Paul Jones (ed.). Name of Encyclopedia I Have Seen. Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 2.

For a source available in hardcopy, microform, and/or online, omit, in most cases, which one you read. While it is useful to cite author, title, edition (1st, 2d, etc.), and similar information, it generally is not important to cite a database such as ProQuest, EbscoHost, or JStor (see the list of academic databases and search engines) or to link to such a database requiring a subscription or a third party's login. The basic bibliographic information you provide should be enough to search for the source in any of these databases that have the source. Don't add a URL that has a part of a password embedded in the URL. However, you may provide the DOI, ISBN, or another uniform identifier, if available. If the publisher offers a link to the source or its abstract that does not require a payment or a third party's login for access, you may provide the URL for that link. And if the source exists only online, give the link even if access is restricted.
Non-English sources
Main page: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources

Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources should be used in preference to non-English language sources of equal caliber and content, though the latter are allowed where appropriate. When quoting a source in a different language, please provide both the original-language quotation and an English translation, in the text, in a footnote, or on the talk page as appropriate, so long as the quotation is not so lengthy that it would violate copyright.
Convenience links
Main page: Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works

A convenience link is a link to a copy of your source on a webpage provided by someone other than the original publisher or author. For example, a copy of a newspaper article no longer available on the newspaper's website may be hosted elsewhere. When offering convenience links, it is important to be reasonably certain that the convenience copy is a true copy of the original, without any changes or inappropriate commentary, and that it does not infringe the original publisher's copyright. Accuracy can be assumed when the hosting website appears reliable. Where several sites host a copy of the material, the site selected as the convenience link should be the one whose general content appears most in line with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Verifiability.
Multimedia

Multimedia material should be referenced just like article text. Citations for a media file should appear on its file page. Image captions should be referenced as appropriate just like any other part of the article. If an infobox or table contains text that needs citing, but the box or table cannot incorporate an inline citation, the citation should appear in a caption or other text that discusses the material. A citation is not needed for descriptions such as alt text that are verifiable directly from the image itself. Material that identifies a source (e.g., the caption "Belshazzar's Feast (1635)" for File:Rembrandt-Belsazar.jpg) is considered attribution and normally does not need further citation.
Avoid scrolling lists
Shortcut:
WP:ASL


Scrolling lists, or lists of citations appearing within a scroll box, should never be used because of issues with readability, accessibility, printing, and site mirroring. Additionally, it cannot be guaranteed that such lists will display properly in all web browsers. See this July 2007 discussion for more detail.
General reference

A general reference is a citation to a reliable source that supports content, but is not displayed as an inline citation. General references are usually listed at the end of the article in a References section. They may be found in underdeveloped articles, especially when all article content is supported by a single source. The disadvantage of using general references is that text-source integrity is lost, unless the article is very short. The sourcing policy, Verifiability, requires inline citations for all quotations, and for anything challenged or likely to be challenged.

A general reference looks like this in the edit box:

The Sun is pretty big, but the Moon is not so big. The Sun is also quite hot.

== References ==
*Brown, R (2006). "Size of the Moon", ''Scientific American'', 51(78).
*Miller, E (2005). ''The Sun'', Academic Press.

This is how it looks in the article:

The Sun is pretty big, but the Moon is not so big. The Sun is also quite hot.

References
Brown, R (2006). "Size of the Moon", Scientific American, 51(78).
Miller, E (2005). The Sun, Academic Press.
Embedded links
Further information: Wikipedia:Embedded citations

Embedded links to external websites should not be used as a form of inline citation, because they are highly susceptible to linkrot. Wikipedia allowed this in its early years—for example by adding a link after a sentence, like this [http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0...1601858,00.html], which looks like this. [1] This is no longer recommended. Raw links are not recommended in lieu of properly written out citations, even if placed between ref tags, like this [http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0...1601858,00.html].

Embedded links should never be used to place external links in the body of an article, like this: "Apple, Inc. announced their latest product..."
Further reading/External links
Main pages: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (layout)#Further reading and Wikipedia:External links

"Further reading" or "External links" are used as section headings for books, articles, and websites related to the topic that have not been used as sources.
What information to include

Shortcuts:
WP:CITE#HOW
WP:CITEHOW


Citation styles and consistency
See also: Citation, APA style, MLA style, The Chicago Manual of Style, Author-date referencing, Vancouver system, Bluebook, and Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style

There are a number of citation styles. See here for some examples. They all include the same information, but vary in punctuation and the order of the author's name, publication date, title, and page numbers.
Style variation
Shortcut:
WP:CITEVAR


All of the citations within each Wikipedia article should follow a consistent style. The citation style chosen for one article does not have to match the citation style chosen for another article, but within each article, the style used should be consistent. If the article you are editing already is already using a particular citation style, you should follow that style.

Do not change the citation style used in an article merely for personal preference or cosmetic reasons. If you think the existing citation system is inappropriate for the specific needs of the article, gain consensus for a change on the talk page before changing it. As with issues of spelling differences, if there is disagreement about which style is best, defer to the style used by the first major contributor. If you are the first major contributor to an article, you may choose whichever style you think best for the article.
To be avoided unless there is consensus
Switching between major citation styles, e.g., switching between parenthetical and tags or between the style preferred by one academic discipline vs. another
Changing the section heading to or from ==References==, ==Notes==, etc.
Adding citation templates to an article that already uses one of the citation formats listed in this guideline
Generally considered to be helpful improvements
Replacing bare URLs with full bibliographic citations: an improvement because it provides more information to the reader and fights linkrot.
Replacing some or all general references with inline citations: an improvement because it provides more information to the reader and helps maintain text-source integrity.
Imposing one style on an article with incompatible citation styles (e.g., some of the citations in footnotes and others as parenthetical references): an improvement because it makes the formatting consistent.
Examples
Books

Citations for books typically include:
name of the author(s)
title of the book in italics
volume when appropriate
city of publication is optional
name of the publisher
year of publication
chapter or page number(s) where appropriate
ISBN where available
Citations for individually authored chapters in books typically include:
name of author
the title of the chapter
name of the book's editor
name of book and other details as above
the chapter number or page numbers for the chapter are optional
Journal articles

Citations for journal articles typically include:
name of the author(s)
year and sometimes month of publication
title of the article within quotation marks
name of the journal in italics
volume number, issue number, and page numbers (article numbers in some electronic journals)
DOI and/or other identifiers where available
Newspaper articles

Citations for newspaper articles typically include:
name of the newspaper in italics
date of publication
byline (author's name), if any
title of the article within quotation marks
city of publication, if not included in name of newspaper
page number(s) are optional
Webpages

Citations for World Wide Web pages typically include:
name of the author(s)
title of the article within quotation marks
name of the website
date of publication
page number(s) (if applicable)
the date you retrieved it (required if the publication date is unknown)
Identifying parts of a source
Shortcut:
WP:Page numbers


When citing lengthy sources, you should identify which part of a source is being cited. For example, in the case of a book, specify the page number(s). Page numbers are not required for a reference to the book as a whole. When you specify a page number, it is helpful to specify the version (date and edition for books) of the source because the layout, pagination, length, etc. can change between editions.
Links and ID numbers

A citation ideally includes a link or ID number to help editors locate the source. If you have a URL (webpage) link, you can add it to the title part of the citation, so that when you add the citation to Wikipedia the URL becomes hidden and the title becomes clickable. To do this, enclose the URL and the title in square brackets—the URL first, then a space, then the title. For example:

Carr A, Ory D (2006). [http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030496 Does HIV cause cardiovascular disease?] ''PLoS Medicine'', 3(11):e496.

For web-only sources with no publication date you should include a "Retrieved" date instead, in case the webpage changes in the future. For example: Retrieved 2008-07-15.

You can also add an ID number to the end of a citation. The ID number might be an ISBN for a book, a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) for an article, or any of several ID numbers that are specific to particular article databases, such as a PMID number for articles on PubMed. It may be possible to format these so that they are automatically activated and become clickable when added to Wikipedia, for example by typing ISBN (or PMID) following by a space followed by the ID number.

If your source is not available online, it should be available in reputable libraries, archives, or collections. If a citation without an external link is challenged as unavailable, any of the following is sufficient to show the material to be reasonably available (though not necessarily reliable): providing an ISBN or OCLC number; linking to an established Wikipedia article about the source (the work, its author, or its publisher); or directly quoting the material on the talk page, briefly and in context.
Citation templates and tools
Shortcut:
WP:CITECONSENSUS

Further information: Wikipedia:Citation templates and Wikipedia:Citation tools
For a comparison of citations using templates with citations written freehand, see Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example edits for different methods.

Citation templates are used to format citations in a consistent way. The use of citation templates is neither encouraged nor discouraged. Templates may be used or removed at the discretion of individual editors, subject to agreement with other editors on the article. Because templates can be contentious, editors should not change an article with a distinctive citation format to another without gaining consensus. Where no agreement can be reached, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.

There are several webpages/tools that can help quickly produce a citation in a standard template format. You may only need one piece of information and they can fill in the rest of the details. The resulting citation will be enclosed in "cite" tags, and it will be formatted in a particular way depending on which kind of template is being used. You can then copy all the text from there. It may still require additional tags before you can add it to a Wikipedia article.
Metadata

Citations may be accompanied by metadata, though it is not mandatory. Most citation templates on Wikipedia use the COinS microformat. Metadata such as this allow browser plugins and other automated software to make citation data accessible to the user, for instance by providing links to their library's online copies of the cited works. In articles that format citations manually, metadata may be added manually in a span, according to the COinS specification; or the templates Template:Citation metadata or Template:COinS can be used.
Citation processing tools
Template:Citation/core – a core template used by other citation templates
User:Citation bot (formerly DOI bot) – a bot that automatically fixes common errors in individual citations, and adds missing fields
User:CitationTool – a tool for finding article-level citation errors and fixing them. Not currently functional.
Programming tools
Wikicite is a free program that helps editors to create citations for their Wikipedia contributions using citation templates. It is written in Visual Basic .NET, making it suitable only for users with the .NET Framework installed on Windows, or, for other platforms, the Mono alternative framework. Wikicite and its source code is freely available; see the developer's page for further details.
Wikicite+ is a program based on the original Wikicite source code. It features extra validation, bug fixes, additional cite templates (such as cite episode) as well as tools for stub sorting and more. It is also available for free under the Apache License 2.0 and is open source.
User:Richiez has tools to automatically handle citations for a whole article at a time. Converts occurrences of {{pmid XXXX}} or {{isbn XXXX}} to properly formatted footnote or Harvard-style references. Written in ruby and requires a working installation with basic libraries.
pubmed2wiki.xsl an XSL stylesheet transforming the XML output of PubMed to Wikipedia refs.
RefTag by Apoc2400 creates a prefilled {{cite book}} template with various options from a Google Books URL. The page provides a bookmarklet for single-click transfer.
wikiciter web interface, does google books, pdf files, beta.
Citation export tools

You can insert a link beside each citation in Wikipedia, allowing you to export the citation to a reference manager, such as EndNote. Just copy this code:
importScript("User:Smith609/endnote.js");

to the end of Special:MyPage/monobook.js. Then, save the page and bypass your browser's cache.
Preventing and repairing dead links
See also: Wikipedia:Link rot
Shortcut:
WP:DEADREF


To help prevent dead links, persistent identifiers are available for some sources. Some journal articles have a digital object identifier (DOI); some online newspapers and blogs, and also Wikipedia, have permalinks that are stable. When permanent links aren't available, consider archiving the referenced document when writing the article; on-demand web archiving services such as WebCite (http://www.webcitation.org) are fairly easy to use (see pre-emptive archiving). Dead links should be repaired or replaced if possible.
First, check the link to confirm that it is dead. The site may have been temporarily down or have changed its linking structure.
The Internet Archive (http://www.archive.org/) has billions of archived webpages. There may be a delay of six months before a link shows up there. See Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine.
UK Government Web Archive (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/webarchive/), a project of The National Archives, preserves 1500 UK central government websites captured by the European Archive Foundation.[13]
Remove the dead link and keep the citation without a link if the material exists offline; for example a journal or newspaper article.
If the source material does not exist offline, and if there is no archived version of the webpage, then the citation should be removed and the material it supports should be regarded as unsourced.
See also Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Citation needed

How to cite
Wikipedia:Verification methods – listing examples of the most common ways that citations are used in Wikipedia articles.
Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style – listing examples of full citations using APA and Harvard referencing techniques.
Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example edits for different methods – showing comparative edit mode representations for different citation methods and techniques.
Wikipedia:Citing sources/Further considerations – information of additional interest.
Wikipedia:Citation templates – a full listing of various styles for citing all sorts of materials.
Wikipedia:External links – for information about the External links appendix
Wikipedia:Improving referencing efforts
Wikipedia:Inline citation
Wikipedia:Layout#Further reading – for information about the Further reading appendix
Wikipedia:List of sources
Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners – a simple practical guide to getting started.
Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines – guidelines for dealing with scientific and mathematical articles.
Citation problems
Template:Citations missing – template to add where citations are needed
Wikipedia:A suggested improvement 0001
Wikipedia:Linkrot – guide to preventing link rot
Wikipedia:Citation needed – explanation of citation needed template
Wikipedia:Copyright problems – in case of text that has been copied verbatim inappropriately.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Citation cleanup – a group of people devoted to cleaning citations
Wikipedia:Bombardment – an essay regarding the overuse of citations
Wikipedia:Citation overkill – why too many citations on one fact can be a bad thing
Wikipedia:Video links – an essay discussing the use of citations linking to YouTube and other user-submitted video sites
Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue

Other
Comparison of reference management software – side-by-side comparison of various Reference management software
Notes
^ See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources
^ See Wikipedia:Layout#Notes and References for information regarding where to place the new appendix in the article.
^ Smith, Jane. Popular Cooks. Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 1.
^ Jones, Paul. More popular Cooks. Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 2.
^ Doe, John. Cooks Ahoy!. Harvard University Press, 2010, p. 3.
^ Doe, Jane. Surely Not More Cooks. Yale University Press, 2010, p. 4.
^ Smith, Jane. Could this be the source?. Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 1.
^ Jones, Paul. Perhaps this is it. Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 2.
^ Doe, John. Or it could be this one. Harvard University Press, 2010, p. 3.
^ Doe, Jane. Just one more to check. Yale University Press, 2010, p. 4.
^ Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, 1971, p. 118ff.
^ Emsley, John (2001). "Oxygen". Nature's Building Blocks: An A-Z Guide to the Elements. Oxford, England, UK: Oxford University Press. p. 297. ISBN 0198503407.
^ Europarchive.org
References
Concordia Libraries (Concordia University). Citation and Style Guides.
Ritter, R. (2002). The Oxford Style Manual. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198605641
The Writers' Workshop, Center for Writing Studies. "Citation Styles Handbook: APA", University of Illinois.
The Writers' Workshop, Center for Writing Studies. "Citation Styles Handbook: MLA", University of Illinois.
University of Chicago Press. (2003). The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition. ISBN 0-226-10403-6
Further reading
A writer's practical guide to MLA documentation
AMA Citation Style
Chicago/Turabian Documentation
Citation Guide - TurabianPDF
Guide to Citation Style Guides
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
American Chemical Society reference style guidelines
Citation Machine
Categories: Wikipedia content guidelines | Wikipedia how-to | General style guidelines | Wikipedia verifiability
Log in / create account
Project page
Discussion
Read
View source
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
‪Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‬
Български
Català
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Latina
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
‪Norsk (bokmål)‬
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Slovenščina
کوردی
Српски / Srpski
Basa Sunda
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
తెలుగు
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
ייִדיש
粵語
中文
This page was last modified on 6 March 2011 at 05:34.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (footnotes)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Footnotes)
"WP:FOOT" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Use common sense in applying it; it will have occasional exceptions. Please ensure that any edits to this page reflect consensus. Shortcuts:
WP:FN
WP:FOOT
WP:NOTES

Style
Manual of Style
Arts
Music
Content
Formatting
Images
Layout
Lists
Legal
Regional
Religion
Science
Wikipedia content
Search


view · talk · edit


Wikipedia footnotes serve two purposes: to add explanatory material, particularly if the added information would be distracting if written out in the main article; or, to present citations to reliable sources that support assertions in the main article.[1] As explained at Wikipedia:Citing sources, footnoting is one of several acceptable ways to present inline citations.

Wikipedia has several mechanisms for creating footnotes that contain reciprocal hyperlinks, so that clicking on a number or symbol found in the main text brings readers to the corresponding footnote, and vice versa. Thus, as described below, two different types of footnote markup may be used to distinguish explanatory footnotes from citation footnotes. See, for example, the Jane Austen article.

The prevailing system for adding footnotes to an article is Cite.php, which involves the tag. This system has several advantages, including automatic sequential numbering of the footnotes and provisions for multiple references to the same footnote. To add such a footnote to an article, the editor includes the text of the footnote between two HTML-style tags (e.g., Text of footnote goes here.). Different classes of footnotes can be defined within an article using the group parameter inside the ref tag, as described below.

Editors may also use the older system of template-based footnotes, such as {{ref label}} and {{note label}}. These have the disadvantage that they are not numbered automatically; the editor has to choose a specific label. It is generally expected that footnotes will be labeled in the order in which they occur in the text. Therefore, if an editor adds such a template-based footnote in the middle of an article, the editor should also renumber/increment all the subsequent footnotes of the same type, by hand.Contents [hide]
1 How to use
1.1 Listing footnotes at the end of the article: using or {{Reflist}}
1.2 Reference name (naming a ref tag so it can be used more than once)
1.3 Citation templates
1.4 Previewing a single section edit
1.4.1 Notes and references not normally visible
1.4.2 Workaround for notes and references
1.4.3 Re-use of reference(s) from another section
1.4.4 Newline after closing ref tag
1.5 Errors and bugs
1.5.1 Known bugs
2 Style
2.1 Ref tags and punctuation
2.2 Style recommendations
3 Display
3.1 Multiple columns
3.2 Avoid scrolling lists
4 Advanced
4.1 Separating reference lists and explanatory notes
5 Cite label styles
5.1 Nesting references: citations within explanatory notes
5.2 List-defined references
6 Caution on converting citation styles
7 Compatibility with other MediaWiki sites
8 See also
9 Notes

[edit]
How to use

Click to see more detail
A simplified explanation is given at Help:Footnotes
Place a ... opening and closing tag where you want a footnote reference number to appear in an article—type the text of the note between the ref tags.
Place the tag or {{Reflist}} tag in either a "Notes" or "References" section as explained in the Guide to Layout — the list of notes will be generated in that section.

This page itself uses footnotes, such as the one at the end of this sentence.[2] If you view the Wikicode of this page by clicking "Edit this page", you can see a working example of footnotes.
[edit]
Listing footnotes at the end of the article: using or {{Reflist}}
See also: Template:Reflist

If you are creating a new article or editing an article that does not have footnotes already and you wish to add footnotes to the article, you must create a new section towards the end of the article (usually titled "Notes" or "References", see Layout) and place one of these in it: or {{Reflist}}.

{{Reflist}} displays the footnotes in a smaller font in the old monobook skin.

{{Reflist|2}} is used to split long listings into a specific number of columns. Three-column lists (and larger) are inaccessible to users with smaller/laptop monitors and should be avoided unless they are supporting shortened footnotes.

To prevent display problems with multi-column formats on smaller monitors, the "colwidth" parameter can be used with {{Reflist}} to specify a fixed column width. The number of columns displayed will then automatically adjust to match the size of the user's browser window. For example, {{Reflist|colwidth=20em}} will display as many columns with a minimum width of 20 ems as will fit in the browser window.

Multi-column lists are not currently supported by Internet Explorer or Safari.

Two of the above options are included in the "markup" below the edit box; if you click on this, it will add it to the page. Once you save your edit, footnotes will be automatically generated in the new references section.
[edit]
Reference name (naming a ref tag so it can be used more than once)
Shortcut:
WP:REFNAME


To give a footnote a unique identifier, use ... . You can then refer to the same footnote again by using a ref tag with the same name like . The name cannot be a number, or the extension will return an error. The ref name need not be placed within quotes unless it contains a space, certain punctuation marks, or non-ASCII characters[3] (the wiki parser converts single word quoteless attribute values into validly quoted XHTML). Note that any quotation marks placed around the ref name must be straight quotes (") rather than curly quotes (“ or ”).

Named references are used when there are several cases of repetition of exactly the same reference, including the page number for books; they should not be used to cite different pages in the same book. Named references in wikitext serve a purpose similar to loc. cit., ibid., Id. or supra in printed media. See also cautions in Style below.

Only the first occurrence of text in a named ref will be used, although that occurrence may be located anywhere in the article. You can either copy the whole footnote, or you can use a terminated empty ref tag that looks like this: . Such forward-slash-terminated named tags may precede the definition of the named reference.[4]

When using named references, many editors prefer for the later instances of the named footnote, rather than copying the whole footnote again. This can improve the readability of the article's text in edit mode, which making finding specific parts of the text when editing less tedious. However, some editors prefer to repeat the entire footnote, to prevent inadvertent removal of the only full copy of the reference, although this approach requires that updates to the footnote be made to all the footnote instances if all the instances are to reflect the current displayed text.

A third alternative is to use only empty references in the body of the article, keeping the text of all references within the reflist template at the end of the article, although this requires manual editing of the reflist template when a reference is added or completely removed. (See List-defined references below.)

In the following example, the same source is cited three times.

This is an example of multiple references to the same footnote. Such references are particularly useful when citing sources where different statements come from the same source.Author, A. (2007). "How to cite references", New York: McGraw-Hill. A concise way to make multiple references is to use empty ref tags, which have a slash at the end.This text is superfluous, and won't show up anywhere. We may as well just use an empty tag.

== Notes ==
{{reflist}}

The edit text above gives the following result in the article:

This is an example of multiple references to the same footnote.[1] Such references are particularly useful when citing sources where different statements come from the same source.[1] A concise way to make multiple references is to use empty ref tags, which have a slash at the end.[1]

Notes
^ a b c Author, A. (2007). "How to cite references", New York: McGraw-Hill.

One should be particularly careful when deleting a named reference with text content, because the footnote text will be deleted unless it is copied to another ref tag with the same name.
[edit]
Citation templates

Text placed between and may be short notes or full bibliographic references, and may be formatted either by hand or with the assistance of templates. Instructions on available templates to help format bibliographic references may be found at Wikipedia:Citation templates. Use of such templates is neither encouraged nor discouraged; see WP:CITE.
[edit]
Previewing a single section edit
[edit]
Notes and references not normally visible

When you edit a single section on a long page, the Notes or References section will not be visible when you preview your edits unless you use the editor gadget wikEd. Thus you ordinarily cannot see how your footnotes (text you place between and tags) will later appear when you save your edits.
[edit]
Workaround for notes and references

A simple workaround is to temporarily insert a or {{Reflist}} tag at the bottom of the edit box of the section you are editing (wikEd does this automatically). Your footnotes will appear at the bottom of your section so you can preview them. When you are satisfied with your edits to the section, delete your temporary or {{Reflist}} tag, and save your edits. Now your footnotes should appear in the "Notes" or "References" section along with other footnotes on the page.

While you preview the footnotes in a section this way, the first footnote in the section will temporarily have a number of one (1), because the preview will not show footnotes from elsewhere on the page. The footnotes will renumber properly across the entire article after you save your edited section.
[edit]
Re-use of reference(s) from another section

Another complication is that you will not be able to preview the effect of citing a footnote from another section merely by citing its name (for example: ). If the section you want to edit reuses footnotes from elsewhere on the page, a simple solution is to edit the whole page at once in order to preview the footnotes accurately.

If you want to avoid this, the only workaround would be to copy and temporarily insert the full code of the relevant reference(s) at the top of the edit box of the section you are editing. If you have used the "workaround for notes and references" (above) the footnotes will appear at the bottom of your section so you can preview them. When you are satisfied with your edits to the section, delete the temporary full reference code and save your edits. Now your footnotes should appear in the "Notes" or "References" section along with other footnotes on the page.
[edit]
Newline after closing ref tag
Shortcut:
WP:NEWREF


Reading inline tags can be difficult in edit mode, particularly where ref tags contain large amounts of reference text, such that simply discerning where the reference ends and the article text begins can be time-consuming.

As a convenience, it may be helpful to carriage return (newline) the article text that comes just after the closing tag, such as:
Article text text Reference text... {return}
→continuing text text text..

This allows editors to see clearly where the ref tag body ends and the article text begins, and it doesn't alter the way the text appears in the output view mode—text sections need to be separated by two newline/carriage returns to be formatted as separate paragraphs.
[edit]
Errors and bugs
For more details on this topic, see Help:Cite errors.

The Cite.php extension includes extensive error checking. Error messages begin with Cite error: and include a link to a help page.
[edit]
Known bugs
Internal links and wiki formatting work as normal within the text of the citation, like this: ''[[Wikipedia]]'', 18 March 2007. However, the "pipe trick" will not expand a link for you in ref text; you must type out [[George Clark (historian)|George Clark]], rather than just typing [[George Clark (historian)|]] and letting the software fill in the text after the pipe. See Help:Pipe trick#Cite.php footnotes and the pipe trick.
When citing a website within the ref tags, include a name for the site inside the brackets for the URL. Unnamed URLs appear as numbers, so [http://www.google.com/] results in the footnote being displayed as [1]; the reader clicks to the numbered footnote only to see another number. Thus, use a name in the link to display the website page title in the reference list, as in this example: [http://www.google.com/ Google].
Avoid use of "subst", or at least verify that it works correctly. A MediaWiki bug (Bugzilla:2700) prevents the expansion of certain (if not all) "subst"'s within refs.
Reading inline tags can be difficult in edit mode (see #Newline after closing ref tag).
[edit]
Style
[edit]
Ref tags and punctuation
Shortcuts:
WP:REFPUN
WP:REFPUNC
WP:REFPUNCT
MOS:REFPUNC

Basic rule

Material may be referenced mid-sentence or at the end of a sentence or paragraph. When a reference tag coincides with punctuation, the tag is placed immediately after the punctuation.
Two exceptions

There are two exceptions, as recommended by the Chicago Manual of Style and other style guides:[5] reference tags are placed before, not after, dashes; and where a reference applies only to material within a parenthetical phrase, the tag may be placed within the closing parenthesis if appropriate.
Example: Paris is not the capital city of England—the capital of which is London[6]—but of France,[7] and is widely known as a beautiful city.[8]
Example: Kim Jong-un (Korean: 김정은,[9] Hanja: 金正恩[10]) is the third and youngest son of Kim Jong-il with his late consort Ko Young-hee.
[edit]
Style recommendations
Shortcut:
WP:IBID

Do not use ibid., Id., or similar abbreviations in footnotes. Other editors who add new references to the article may not take the time to correct Ibid references broken by their addition (op. cit. is less problematic in that it should refer explicitly to a citation contained in the article; however, not all readers are familiar with the meaning of the terms). If a reference is reused in more than one footnote, it is preferable to use the format "Smith, Short Title, 182" rather than "Ibid, 182", so as to avoid these problems, or use named references if appropriate.
Consider maintaining a separate bibliography/references section that gives full publication details for frequently cited sources, then you only need to cite the author, short title or year of publication, and page number in specific notes, following shortened footnotes. For examples of this usage, see Johannes Kepler and Rabindranath Tagore.
The decision on whether to use quotes in footnotes is primarily a decision of style and may vary from article to article. Some citation templates include parameters for quotes, and quoted text can also be added inside a footnote either preceding or following a template-produced citation. Quoting text can be useful for the verifiability of material in an article. Footnoted quotes are acceptable if they are brief, relevant to the article text that is being footnoted, compliant to copyright (including fair use where applicable), of use or interest to the reader, and not used as an evasion of other guidance (most notably: content policy).[11] Where there is disagreement on the use of quotations in footnotes on a particular article, consensus should be sought on the talk page for that article.
[edit]
Display
[edit]
Multiple columns

Footnotes can be formatted in columns by using {{Reflist|number of columns}}. See the template documentation for browser support issues.

Using a set number of columns may make text too narrow when displayed with large fonts or small screens. Using {{Reflist|30em}} will allow the browser to automatically choose the number of columns based on the font size selected by the user and width of the web browser. Choose a column width that is appropriate for the average width of the references on the page.

Multicolumn display can be disabled for your account by customizing your personal CSS file. See the template documentation for more information.
[edit]
Avoid scrolling lists

As explained in more detail at WP:Citing sources, scrolling lists of references should never be used because of issues with readability, accessibility, printing, site mirroring, and display.
[edit]
Advanced
[edit]
Separating reference lists and explanatory notes
Shortcuts:
WP:REFGROUP
WP:REFNOTE


It may be desirable for an article to list sources separately from explanatory notes. When this is done the sources may appear in an alphabetized list unlinked to the article (e.g., Starship Troopers) or in a list that is linked to specific text in the article by footnotes (e.g., Jane Austen).[12] A separate section containing references is usually given the title "References", while the explanatory notes section retains the "Notes" title.

One way to generate a linked list of sources involves the group= option of the tag, which is analogous to the name= option described above. In this approach, narrative references are given their own "group" namespace. The group identifier is specified inside explanatory note tags and its final tag. The closing tag does not change.

For example:

Claim AClaim A explained.

Claim BClaims B and D explained.

Claim CClaim C referenced.

Claim D

Claim E{{#tag:ref|Claim E explained.Nested reference for explanation of claim E.|group="nb"}}

== Notes ==


== References ==


Rendering:

Claim A[nb 1]

Claim B[nb 2]

Claim C[1]

Claim D[nb 2]

Claim E[nb 3]

Notes
1. ^ Claim A explained.
2. ^ a b Claims B and D explained.
3. ^ Claim E explained.[2]

References
1. ^ Claim C referenced.
2. ^ Nested reference for explanation of claim E.

It is also possible to use the reference templates, e.g., {{ref label}} and {{note label}} to separate a sources list from content notes. As with all citation styles, consensus should be achieved on the talk page before implementing such a change.
[edit]
Cite label styles
Shortcut:
WP:CITELABEL

For more details on this topic, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (footnotes)/Cite link labels.

The in-text cite links and the reference list cites use matching labels that default to decimals. These labels can be styled with predefined group names. Styled labels are generally used in tables, image captions, infoboxes and navboxes to separate them from regular footnotes. New styles may be created with some limitations.

Current label styles are:Group name Style
decimal Decimal numbers
lower-alpha Alpha, lower case
lower-greek Greek, lower case
lower-roman Roman, lower case


For example, using the group name of "lower-alpha", the cite labels will use lower case alpha characters.
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
! 05/08
| 4266 || 7828 || 7282 || 1105 || 224 || 161 || 916|| 506 || 231 || 4127 || 6190 || 6487 || 1139 || 241 || 205 || 1165 || 478 || 301
|}

{{reflist |group=lower-alpha |refs=
{{cite book |last=Elk |first=Anne |title=[[Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses]] |date=November 16, 1972}}
{{cite book |last=Elk |first=Anne |title=Anne Elk's Other Theory on Brontosauruses |date=November 16, 1972}}
{{cite book |last=Elk |first=Anne |title=Anne Elk's Greater Theory on Brontosauruses |date=November 16, 1972}}}}05/08 4266 7828 7282[a] 1105 224[b] 161 916[c] 506 231 4127 6190 6487 1139 241 205 1165 478 301

^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Other Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Greater Theory on Brontosauruses.


Using a group name of "lower-greek":05/08 4266 7828 7282[α] 1105 224[β] 161 916[γ] 506 231 4127 6190 6487 1139 241 205 1165 478 301

^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Other Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Greater Theory on Brontosauruses.


Using a group name of "lower-roman":05/08 4266 7828 7282[i] 1105 224[ii] 161 916[iii] 506 231 4127 6190 6487 1139 241 205 1165 478 301

^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Other Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Greater Theory on Brontosauruses.


The "decimal" style duplicates the format of unstyled footnotes, but is useful when a numeric group is desired separate from standard footnotes.05/08 4266 7828 7282[1] 1105 224[2] 161 916[3] 506 231 4127 6190 6487 1139 241 205 1165 478 301

^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Other Theory on Brontosauruses.
^ Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972). Anne Elk's Greater Theory on Brontosauruses.
[edit]
Nesting references: citations within explanatory notes
Shortcut:
WP:REFNEST


Explanatory notes may need to be referenced. Due to limitations in the Cite.php software, reference tags cannot be nested; that is a set of tags cannot be placed inside another pair of tags; attempting to do so will result in a cite error.

The magic word {{#tag:ref}} may be used to nest references. The markup is:
{{#tag:ref|refcontent|name=name|group=groupname}}

where refcontent may include tags. The name and groupname are optional, but must come after refcontent. A named #tag:ref construct may be reused by invoking:


Attempting to use #tag:ref more than once within list-defined references will result in a cite error; see bug 20707. Only one set of tags may be included within {{#tag:ref}}; attempting to nest multiple references will render the reference list oddly.
[edit]
List-defined references
Shortcut:
WP:LDR

See also: Help:Footnotes#List-defined references

As of September 2009, references may be defined within markup or with {{reflist}} using |refs= and invoked within the content. This can help separate large reftags with long cite entries from the ordinary text, making it easier to read and to edit.

An example (uses a group just to separate it from other examples):
The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
Amazingly few discotheques provide jukeboxes.
How razorback-jumping frogs can level six piqued gymnasts.

This is the lazy dog reference.
This is the jukeboxes reference.
This is the jumping frogs reference.


The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.[Ref 1] Amazingly few discotheques provide jukeboxes.[Ref 2] How razorback-jumping frogs can level six piqued gymnasts.[Ref 3]
^ This is the lazy dog reference.
^ This is the jukeboxes reference.
^ This is the jumping frogs reference.

List defined references can also be implemented using a {{reflist|refs=}} template. Any blank lines placed between the citations in a reflist will make no difference to the download size or output format of an article. Thus, for ease of editing and article maintenance, it can be helpful to separate the citations using a blank line between each cite.

Another example (uses a second group to separate it from other examples):
Rats live on no evil star.
Mountains rarely visit religious leaders.
The man on the flying trapeze does not have life insurance.


{{reflist|group="Ref2"|refs=
This is the rats reference.

This is the mountains reference.
This is the flying trapeze reference.
}}

Rats live on no evil star.[Ref2 1] Mountains rarely visit religious leaders.[Ref2 2] The man on the flying trapeze does not have life insurance.[Ref2 3]
^ This is the rats reference.
^ This is the mountains reference.
^ This is the flying trapeze reference.

Defined references must be used within the body; unused references will show an error message. The references will appear numbered in the order that they are referred to in the text, regardless of how they are ordered within the reflist/references template. For an article which may have many references it's a good idea to name and sort the references in an orderly way for editing purposes. One way is to follow the Harvard style, like name = "Author_Date_Publisher" on the form "AuthorLastName_YYYY-MM-DD_Publisher" and sort the references on this key.
[edit]
Caution on converting citation styles

An older system using {{ref}} and {{note}} templates is still common. Converting this older system[29] to the new ... system can make the references in an article easier to maintain.

Converting citation styles should not be done without first gaining consensus for the change on the article's talk page.

A December 2005 ArbCom case ruled that the following scripts could no longer be used by a certain Wikipedian:
Wikipedia:Footnote3/numlink2note.pl, explained at Wikipedia talk:Footnote3/numlink2note.pl
Wikipedia:Footnote3/order-footnote.pl, explained at Wikipedia talk:Footnote3/order-footnote.pl

Similarly, individual users may be forbidden to "manually convert citation styles on any articles."

So, tread lightly, and seek consensus first, before converting citation styles. For example, when using (semi-)bot tools as listed below:
User:Cyde/Ref converter converts articles that use the {{ref}} and {{note}} system into the more recent mw:Extension:Cite/Cite.php system;
Citation Tool diagnoses and fixes sequencing and duplication errors in Cite.php references. In the future, Citation Tool may (optionally) enable user-guided conversion of some or all of the -numbered citations to named notes using the footnote3 template technology (which includes Harvard references).

CAUTION: do not edit-war with automated tools that convert in opposing directions.
[edit]
Compatibility with other MediaWiki sites

As of late December 2005, the mw:Extension:Cite/Cite.php extension to MediaWiki has been installed on all Wikimedia wikis. Other wikis that use the MediaWiki software may not have this extension installed, and therefore may be unable to display Cite.php footnotes. The Special:Version page on any MediaWiki wiki shows the installed extensions.

Extensions like Cite/Cite.php are installed after installing MediaWiki software; these extension files are placed in the directory wiki/extensions/.
[edit]
See also
Wikipedia:Verifiability, the relevant policy regarding what material should be cited
Wikipedia:Citing sources, the relevant style guide.
Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style, listing also several examples of non-numbered APA style and Harvard referencing techniques
Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles for complete list of templates that are available for citations; note that several of these templates can easily be combined with "footnote3" footnotes, see Gymnopédie#Notes and references for an example.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikicite: Proposal for use of database of citations.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
Other types of numbered footnotes, of historical interest only:
Wikipedia:Footnote1, a very old, manually numbered footnote system that should not be used.
Wikipedia:Footnote2, another obsolete system that should not be used.
Wikipedia:Footnote3, an automatically numbered footnote system using templates, which is widely used but has been replaced by MediaWiki footnotes.
Help:Footnotes
mw:Extension:Cite/Cite.php (formerly at meta:Cite.php) – description of the .../ system at metawiki
meta:Biblio – Biblio.php, an extension of Mediawiki which provides a citation manager. (beta maturity)
Bug 2745: Have References text edit window on Edit pages.
Template:Reflist-talk – for use on talk pages
Template:Rp – adds ability to handle Harvard-style page number citations to Cite.php inline references (intended for use when one source is cited a large number of times, and would produce either too many individual entries under for the same source, or one exceedingly long entry that cited too many pages to possibly be useful to readers).
m:Wikicite an idea for standardizing how facts are cited.
m:Wikicat is the bibliographic catalog used by the WikiTextrose project.
m:WikiTextrose, a text relationship database for mapping the various interactions between interpretable artifacts.
Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners A simple practical guide to getting started.
Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2007_April_20#Citing_the_same_source_multiple_times_in_the_same_paragraph Discussion on referencing for consecutive sentences supported by the same source.
[edit]
Notes
^ Citing sources is important for improving the quality of Wikipedia's articles. A key content policy, Wikipedia:Verifiability, says that any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, including any contentious material about living people and all quotations, must have a source. Unsourced or poorly sourced material may be removed from any article, and if it is, the burden of proof is on the editor who wishes to restore it.
^ This footnote is used as an example in the "How to use" section.
^ Specifically, quotes are not necessary if the name contains only printable ASCII characters excluding space, straight double quote ("), dollar sign ($), percent sign (%), straight single quote ('), plus sign (+), equals sign (=), backslash (\), and the greater-than sign (>). With quotes, the only restriction is that the name may not contain the less-than sign (<) or the quote character.
^ Wikipedia Signpost. November 13, 2006.
^ The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed. 2010, Clause 14.21, p. 666: "Relative to other punctuation, the [note] number follows any punctuation mark except for the dash, which it precedes. [...] Though a note number normally follows a closing parenthesis, it may on rare occasion be more appropriate to place the number inside the closing parenthesis—if, for example, the note applies to a specific term within the parenthesis."
Other style guides suggesting that superscript note reference numbers be placed after punctuation include: Oxford/Hart's Rules, the MLA Style Manual, APA Style, Dictionary.com, IEEE style and Legal Blue Book Style (as well as the general exception for dashes, guides may variously make other exceptions for colons, semicolons and quotation marks).
New Hart's (17.2.2): "The cue is placed after any punctuation (normally after the closing point of a sentence). If, however, it relates only to text within parentheses it is placed before the closing parenthesis."
The MLA Style Manual (Achtert & Gibaldi, 1985), referring to superscripted note numbers, says: "They follow punctuation marks except dashes and occasionally parentheses. (When the note is to only the material that appears within parentheses, the note number is placed before the closing parenthesis.)"
The journal Nature places references before punctuation.
^ Smith, John. London is the Capital of England. Publisher's name, 2010, p.1.
^ Smith, John. Paris is the Capital of France. Publisher's name, 2010, p. 1.
^ Smith, John. Paris is Beautiful. Publisher's name, 2010, p. 1.
^ A reference specific to the Korean text would go here.
^ A reference specific to the Hanja text would go here.
^ For example, to work around the proscription placed on editors by Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Attributing and substantiating biased statements.
^ See Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information about alternative ways to present citations.
^ The Wikipedia:Footnote3 system created footnotes with the {{ref}}/{{note}} and the {{ref_label}}/{{note_label}} pairs of templates. The system may be encountered on many Wikipedia pages.
This example footnote was not created with ... Additional footnotes that follow a which do not continue the numbering are mistakes; they should be corrected by converting them to footnotes using "ref" tags. If they are not true references, they can be put in a separate section; see Wikipedia:Layout for some commonly used possibilities.
Categories: Wikipedia how-to | Wikipedia Manual of Style (layout)
Log in / create account
Project page
Discussion
Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
العربية
Català
Česky
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
नेपाली
日本語
‪Norsk (bokmål)‬
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Slovenčina
Српски / Srpski
中文
This page was last modified on 11 March 2011 at 14:23.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Wikipedia:WikiProject American football. This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians.
Guide to WikiProjects • Directory of WikiProjects
WikiProject on Football Shortcuts:
WP:WPF
WP:FOOTBALL
WP:FOOTY
WP:SOCCER


Main pages
Main project talk
Task forces and sub-projects talk
Football portal talk
New articles talk
Cleanup articles talk
Unreferenced BLPs talk
Article alerts
Popular pages
Football Assessment
Assessment department talk
Assessment log
Manual of style
Club articles talk
Club templates talk
National team articles talk
National team templates talk
National association articles talk
National assn. templates talk
Competition articles talk
League season articles talk
Match articles talk
Player articles talk
Stadium articles talk
Other
Category structure talk
Notability criteria talk
Fully professional leagues talk
Template list talk
Sources and links talk
Members talk
Project milestones talk
Did You Know? archive talk
This box: view · talk · edit


Welcome to this WikiProject related to association football. This page and its subpages contain suggestions on how to improve the articles on the subject. If you would like to help, please inquire on the talk page or write yourself up below. The significant milestones and achievements of the project, can be found at the Milestones subpage.Contents [hide]
1 Scope
2 Goals
3 Members
4 Manual of style
4.1 Articles
4.2 Categories
4.3 Templates
4.4 Notability
5 Sources
6 Assessment department
7 Open tasks
7.1 New articles
7.2 Requested articles
7.3 Articles currently under a review
7.4 Nominations for deletion and page moves
8 Showcase
8.1 Featured content
8.2 Previously reviewed articles
9 Similar WikiProjects
10 Descendent WikiProjects
11 External links

[edit]
Scope

This WikiProject aims primarily to establish and organize standards for football related articles resulting in well-structured and well-written articles, and possibly also in featured articles, and also making all articles related to football easy to find.
Did you know?... that England international footballer and twice FA Cup winner Harry Goodhart became Professor of Humanities at the University of Edinburgh? (11 February 2011)
... that Clare Taylor represented England in the World Cup at both football and cricket? (14 February 2011)
... that Aslie Pitter, founder of Stonewall F.C., Britain's first and most successful gay football club, was made a Member of the Order of the British Empire for his work fighting homophobia in London? (15 February 2011)
... that Master of the Blankney Hunt, Edgar Lubbock played in four FA Cup Finals, twice on the winning side? (19 February 2011)
... that Sean Hughes MP got Scottish MPs to give him their free tickets to the 1986 English FA Cup Final so his constituents could watch the Everton–Liverpool Merseyside derby? (24 February 2011)

These extracts from newly created football articles appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page on the date shown. A full archive of all football related entries is maintained on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Did you know.

[edit]
Goals

Write articles:
on an overview of football in every country.
on women's national teams in every country.
on all notable football clubs in every country.
on all notable football players in every country.
on all notable football stadiums in every country.
on all notable football competitions in every country.

Improve articles:
to make them comply with standards set up here.
to make them featured articles eventually.

Categorize articles:
to make it easy to find what you want to find.
[edit]
Members

You can find a list of all Members here. Joining WikiProject Football is easy - just add your username to the bottom of the list. When joining the project, you should watch this page. This allows you to keep up-to-date with discussions about the project on the talk page.
[edit]
Manual of style

Guidelines and help pages for writing articles and other contributions.
[edit]
Articles

Manual of style for a few common types of article:
Club manual of style
National team manual of style
National association manual of style
Competition manual of style
League season manual of style
Match manual of style
Player manual of style
Stadium manual of style
[edit]
Categories

Info on in what category articles should be placed:
Category structure
[edit]
Templates

Numerous templates exist, how to find them and how to use them:
Template list
[edit]
Notability

How to know if an article should be on Wikipedia or not:
Notability criteria
Leagues that are fully professional to confer player notability
[edit]
Sources

Members of the project have collected a list of sources and links that could be of help to editors wishing to expand articles. The links collection lists all the websites of governing bodies such as FIFA and UEFA. It also contains player databases for all levels of competition, from National level to club level. The booklist lists some of the books that project members own. These members can be contacted for help in sourcing if information from these books is needed.
Link collection
Booklist
[edit]
Assessment department

The assessment department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Association football related articles.
[edit]
Open tasks
[edit]
New articles

For a list of recently created football articles, see:
New articles
[edit]
Requested articles
Follow this link to go to the specific section of Wikipedia:Requested articles that lists the requested articles for football.
[edit]
Articles currently under a review

This section lists those articles that are currently undergoing Peer review or are currently featured content candidates. Current good article candidates can be found on the good article candidates page under the Sports subheading.Current Featured Content candidates
Article Status Peer Review FAC/FLC
Malmö FF Current FAC FAC
Eduard Streltsov Current FAC FAC
Scotland national football team 1872–1899 results Current FLC FLC
List of New York Cosmos all-stars Current FLC FLC
List of Manchester United F.C. players (25–99 appearances) Current FLC FLC
List of Watford F.C. players Current FLC FLC
Articles currently undergoing peer review
Article Status Peer Review FAC/FLC
Fraizer Campbell Peer review ongoing PR
Shaun Whalley Peer review ongoing PR

[edit]
Nominations for deletion and page moves
Important
If you're thinking about nominating an article for deletion (only articles, not templates or categories), please consider the following two alternative options:
Does the article meet the criteria for speedy deletion? If so, just tag it with one of the speedy deletion tags and an administrator will delete it (as long as they agree).
Is the deletion likely to be uncontested? If so then add a proposed deletion tag to it instead; if uncontested after seven days, the article will be automatically deleted.

Only if you think the deletion will be contested and debated is it necessary to go through AfD.

When listing a deletion or page move nomination here, please copy-paste the relevant notice to the deletion discussion:
* '''Note''': This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves|WikiProject Football]]'s list of association football-related deletions. ~~~~
* '''Note''': This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves|WikiProject Football]]'s list of association football-related page moves. ~~~~

‎Article/Category/Template Nomination Date
Andrus Mitt + 2 AfD 2011-02-15
Vitālijs Artjomenko + 2 AfD 2011-02-24
Main opponents of A.C. Milan + 1 AfD 2011-02-26
P M Radhakrishnan + 1 AfD 2011-02-27
Jarek Whiteman + 1 AfD 2011-03-01
Raheem Sterling AfD 2011-03-04
Medi Abalimba AfD 2011-03-05
Michael Nardiello AfD 2011-03-05
Matthew Theodore AfD 2011-03-05
Paul Donnelly (Irish footballer) AfD 2011-03-06
Robert Murray (footballer born 1993) AfD 2011-03-06
Lim Ki-Han AfD 2011-03-06
Martin Mravec AfD 2011-03-06
Tahseen Jabbary AfD 2011-03-06
Charles Berstad AfD 2011-03-06
Hörður Magnússon AfD 2011-03-08
Mitchell Rangers F.C. AfD 2011-03-08
Ján Varga AfD 2011-03-08
Takahide Miyauchi AfD 2011-03-08
Somrit Ornsomjit AfD 2011-03-09
James Marwood AfD 2011-03-09
AFC Marlborough AfD 2011-03-09
Naratip Phanprom AfD 2011-03-09
Sittisak Tarapan AfD 2011-03-09
Kraisorn Sriyan AfD 2011-03-09
Chayanan Pombuppha AfD 2011-03-09
Geoff Adams AfD 2011-03-09
Yordan Tushev AfD 2011-03-09
Anton Hysén AfD 2011-03-09
Jonathon Tiffoney AfD 2011-03-10
Donal Greene AfD 2011-03-10
UEFA Champions League team performances AfD 2011-03-11
Tobago official football team AfD 2011-03-11
Găgăuzia national football team AfD 2011-03-11
Tasmania official football team AfD 2011-03-11
Nauru national soccer team AfD 2011-03-11
James Shea AfD 2011-03-12
Silesia national football team PROD 2011-03-03
Madeira regional football team PROD 2011-03-03
Pohnpei football team PROD 2011-03-03
Yap football team PROD 2011-03-03
Maxwelltown Thistle FC PROD 2011-03-06
Michael Smith (football) PROD 2011-03-06
Ryan Berry PROD 2011-03-06
Gary Haveron PROD 2011-03-06
Lee Colligan PROD 2011-03-06
Dwayne Nelson PROD 2011-03-06
Albert Watson (footballer born 1985) PROD 2011-03-06
Antonieta Gonzalez Collins PROD 2011-03-06
Olly Lee PROD 2011-03-06
Sports Group of European Former Football Players Associations PROD 2011-03-06
ASEAN 2030 FIFA World Cup bid PROD 2011-03-06
Pavle Ugrekhelidze BLP-PROD 2011-03-07
Sergo Phirtskhalaishvili BLP-PROD 2011-03-07
Jemal Gogiberidze BLP-PROD 2011-03-07
Danny O'Donnell (Scottish footballer) PROD 2011-03-07
Glenn Hand PROD 2011-03-07
2007–08 Lancashire Senior Cup PROD 2011-03-07
2008–09 Lancashire Senior Cup PROD 2011-03-07
2009–10 Lancashire Senior Cup PROD 2011-03-07
Takumi Ake PROD 2011-03-10
Rafael Harutyunyan PROD 2011-03-11
Khoren Veranyan PROD 2011-03-11
Naim Qarri PROD 2011-03-11
Hasan Myrta PROD 2011-03-11
Ermal Kenga PROD 2011-03-11
Rothwell Town A.F.C. PROD 2011-03-12
Nemanja Janković PROD 2011-03-12
Burray Football Club PROD 2011-03-12
Chris Mumple PROD 2011-03-12
Association football by nationality and positions Categories CfD 2011-02-27
Category:Scottish Premier League Manager Of The Month Award Winner CfD 2011-03-04
Category:Scottish Premier League Players Of The Month Award Winners CfD 2011-03-04
Category:FIFA World Cup losing squad templates CfD 2011-03-11
Template:NF-Board teams TfD 2011-03-01
Template:Non-FIFA governing bodies TfD 2011-03-01
Template:Sheffield & Hallamshire Senior Cup Seasons TfD 2011-03-07
Template:2009–10 Honduran Liga Nacional squads
Template:2010–11 Honduran Liga Nacional squads TfD 2011-03-11
File:29314 giuseppe mascara.jpg Commons 2011-03-08

See also WikiProject Football/Article alerts where all nominated articles with the projecttag, {{Football}}, are automatically listed, and WikiProject Deletion sorting/Football where deletion nominations are sometimes listed.

Old deletion nominations can be found in the archives:
This year's archive
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
[edit]
Showcase

Some of the articles supported by WikiProject Football have reached featured article or featured list status (FA and FL, respectively), meaning they are amongst the very best content in Wikipedia. They are listed below; a bold title indicates the article was "today's featured article" for the date listed. Also included here are articles that are featured article candidates (FAC) that failed, those that have undergone peer review (PR) as part of an effort to get them to FA status, and those that have achieved good article (GA) status, the next-highest level of quality.
[edit]
Featured content[show]
Featured topics, Featured pictures and Featured portals
[show]
Featured articles
[show]
Featured lists
[show]
Good articles

[edit]
Previously reviewed articles

This section lists articles that have gone through an external peer review. This includes articles that have been through a peer review, or a featured article or featured list nomination but were deemed to have failed to meet the criteria at the time. It also lists those articles were previously featured but subsequently de-listed due to a featured article review.[show]
Failed featured content and Peer reviewed articles

[edit]
Similar WikiProjects

For other WikiProjects on other forms of football, see:
WikiProject Australian Football League (Australian rules football)
WikiProject American football (American football)
WikiProject College football (American college football)
WikiProject National Football League (gridiron football)
WikiProject Rugby (rugby football)
WikiProject Rugby league (rugby league)
WikiProject Rugby union (rugby union)
[edit]
Descendent WikiProjects
For an up-to-date WikiProject Council directory listing for football, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Sports#Football (soccer).
U.S. and Canadian soccer
Australian football
Non-league football
Irish football
Argentine Football
[edit]
External links


A cleanup listing for this project is available, updated by WolterBot. More information...

Article alerts for this project are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...
Wikiproject Watchlist - WikiProject Football
Categories: Projects subscribed to Article Alerts | WikiProject Sports | WikiProject Football | WikiProjects participating in Wikipedia 1.0 assessments
Log in / create account
Project page
Discussion
Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
العربية
‪Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‬
Български
Česky
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Српски / Srpski
Suomi
Svenska
ไทย
Tiếng Việt
中文
This page was last modified on 12 March 2011 at 13:02.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers

Wikipedia:WikiProject
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For information about the "Wikipedia:" project namespace, see Wikipedia:Project namespace.
Shortcuts:
WP:PROJ
WP:PJ


A WikiProject is a project to manage a specific topic or family of topics within Wikipedia. It is composed of a collection of pages and a group of editors who use those pages to collaborate on encyclopedic work. It is not a place to write encyclopedia articles directly, but a resource to help coordinate and organize the writing and editing of those articles.

The discussion pages attached to a project page are a convenient forum for those interested in that project.
[edit]
Finding a project
WikiProject Council
edit · changes

Main page + talk
WikiProject guide
Introduction
WikiProjects
Task forces
Technical notes
Directories
WikiProjects
Proposals





Directory of WikiProjects
WikiProject Council
Guide to WikiProjects



WikiProjects are welcoming towards new participants; please feel free to join any or all that interest you!
[edit]
Creating and maintaining a project

Before starting, read the guide to WikiProject organization, and peruse some existing WikiProjects to understand how they operate "in the wild". If you're not sure about creating a new project, or aren't certain if anyone else is interested, you can make a WikiProject proposal; like-minded editors may start new WikiProjects at any time and are encouraged, but not obligated, to propose them before doing so, as they may thus receive valuable input and save a lot of work.
[edit]
Others

For additional resources, or if you have any questions, please visit the WikiProject Council or see List of Wikimedia projects for details.





Note: Wikipedia WikiProjects are not Wikimedia sister projects; nor are they Wikipedia school and university projects.
Categories: WikiProjects
Log in / create account
Project page
Discussion
Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
‪Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‬
Български
Català
Česky
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Lietuvių
Magyar
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
‪Norsk (bokmål)‬
‪Norsk (nynorsk)‬
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
සිංහල
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / Srpski
Suomi
Svenska
తెలుగు
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
This page was last modified on 11 March 2011 at 02:22.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers