Talk:Croton persimilis

Discussion

Brunswicknic: now please explain, this is mystifying. You have a Further Reading item - this means that it gives an additional source that is not used as an actual reference in the article. Then you go and reference that with an anchor to an existing reference. This either means that the additional item is in fact identical to a used source (and thus should not be listed) or that the reference does not pertain to this item at all (and thus not should be attached to it). In either case it makes no sense. - To top it off, this anchor produces a cite error, for no reason I can discern, and must be removed at least until that is sorted out. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

2 articles and acknowledging the source of further reading

@Elmidae: The 2 Chakrabarty and Balakrishnan articles are different, they have different titles and are published in different years. I had access to the most recent. I have not been able to access the other, which I believe is from the title to be more comprehensive and contained the first revision of the species. The later, 2017, paper is an elaboration on the names primacy. I have had no problems opening up the 2017 paper from my location. Why ref the further reading: because I am acknowledging the source of these suggested further readings, i.e. POWO. @Elmidae: Thank you for giving me time to add my bit above to the talk page, as I indicated in my latest edit. Please see above for the reasons of two articles and ref. I do not get cite error on the page I am looking at, the links are working fine. Could you say where the cite error is? @Elmidae: Ah, there is the cite error, as you had changed the page again, I didn't see it. That cite error is because you moved the further reading section to after the references. Therefore wp did not accept a ref after the closing of the references section. You made the cite error appear. You have been rude in your language, you have not used headings on the talk page. I am going to return the section to above the references, and return the reference. I strongly suggest that you take a deep breath. Brunswicknic (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Brunswicknic - thanks, this makes more sense. The Further Reading section belongs after the reflist, as per WP:MOS, and as it generally does not contain any references, things then work as they should. But it's probably easier to keep things as they are now. (BTW, "rude" is something else, try "slightly exasperated") --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)