Wikipedia talk:Basic citation concepts

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organize and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.Wikipedia essaysWikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysTemplate:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

As I have stated in introduction to this essay: we have confused and conflicting understandings of the basic concepts of citation impedes both the practice of citation, and discussion of the practice and the attendant problems. This essay is an attempt to resolve that confusion by formulating clear, definite, consistent, and workable definitions of the basic citation concepts and the terms by which they are referred.

I think I've made a fair start, but am inviting comment on how well it is going, and on what might be improved. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I admire the drive to resolve the conflict. The essay as it stands now is dense; if you would like it to be a reference guide for beginners, I would suggest making the language a little more approachable and less defensive. One content suggestion I would make is including the different definitions for "reference": In the case that users do not immediately follow this guide, at least they might be able to learn how the other side in a dispute is using the term. I think that much of the common citation pitfalls discussed come from the automatic citation widget. Perhaps, once this is finished being written, point its developers this way? Good luck! Mooeena ● 💌 ● ✒️ ● ❓ 00:23, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mooeena: Thank you. I will consider what might be said about "references".

The "automatic citation widget" you mention: that would be the one the the Visual Editor? That's actually a symptom. The problems with citation appear to have been present from the start of Wikipedia, and are deeply embedded. That's why a solution has to start with some bedrock definitions.

I think I understand what you mean by "density", and to some extent that is deliberate: this is intended more to establish some key points rather than be a tutorial, though it needs to be intelligible for beginners. Possibly I don't quite understand the best way of doing that. Perhaps you could offer an example or two? That would be much appreciated. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 18:40, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think a good solution would to create a tutorial teaching complete beginners how to properly cite as a companion to this essay.

Oh, yes, that is exactly the plan. Some would say we already have such, but I say it's broken. And previous attempts to alter any of the existing documentation have foundered on differences of long-cherished opinions, and on plain just not having a common set of concepts. The problem with tutorials is that beginners need to work out a way of doing something before learning all of the ways it can be done, which inherently favors the presented approach. What I am trying to do here is work out basic concepts needed for discussing how we should go about citation, regardless of what approach is taken in teaching it. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to get more feedback on this before moving it, but a discussion is starting where this will be needed. So I've moved it out of Draft, and hopefully no major rework is required. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]