Talk:11th Massachusetts Battery
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 11th Massachusetts Battery article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of 11th Massachusetts Battery be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Citations
editJust a quick explanation about why I erroneously tagged this article. The citation style on this article isn't quite in the standard style, and I had not personally encountered it elsewhere. In a typical article, the reflist is in a section named 'References' with the bibliography being in a subsection of that called 'Sources'. The notes section, if it exists at all, is used primarily for providing commentary on the text, where including it in the article itself would interrupt the flow of the paragraph or otherwise disrupt the text. Look at John Adams, a featured article, for an example of what I mean. However, your comment about the Harvard style prompted me to read up on it, and I discovered WP:CITESHORT. Apparently, Wikipedia does allow this alternate citation style in certain circumstances. You learn something new every day, I guess. Cheers. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 18:29, 22 June 2020 (UTC) + minor spelling fix --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 18:35, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- Glad this gave you an opportunity to read up on WP:CITESHORT which is used in many articles and a convenience to the reader. I would disagree with you that the format here isn't "quite in the standard style." Putting the reflist in a section called "Notes" and the sources in a section called "References" goes way back. It was stipulated once upon a time by reviewers in FAC reviews. I would direct your attention to the Featured Articles, 21st Massachusetts, 22nd Massachusetts, and 6th Massachusetts. Granted, different section headings including "Sources" have become commonplace since, but the "Notes" and "Reference" headings remain common practice. Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2020 (UTC)