The article was not promoted by Karanacs 15:07, 28 April 2009 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
Part of {{ Invincibles Advert}} FT drive... YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Comments - I agree with Brian on the reference strings. I count eight strings of six or more references, including five of the 20+ variety. Are there really no books or other sources that can cite these facts without making readers look through that many match scorecards? The early part seems quite good, if heavy on cricket jargon. I'll try to come back and read it more closely later, but it may be a few days before I return due to a heavy real-life workload. Giants2008 ( 17-14) 03:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Here is how that might look in this article. The only problem then is in using the individual citations more than once, but a bit of creative thinking should be able to get around this. Steve T • C 08:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply
<ref><br />
Smith, Jones, [http://www.smith.com The Smith Report], published by Smith Enterprises on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.<br />
Brown, Thomas, [http://www.jones.com The Jones Report], published by Jones Family Corp on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.<br />
Banks, Steve, [http://www.banks.com The Banks Report], published by Banks and Company on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.
</ref>
There is nothing too major in all of that and happy to support when addressed. The string of refs may require a technical fix. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 09:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Brianboulton ( talk) 10:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC) reply
The article was not promoted by Karanacs 15:07, 28 April 2009 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
Part of {{ Invincibles Advert}} FT drive... YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Comments - I agree with Brian on the reference strings. I count eight strings of six or more references, including five of the 20+ variety. Are there really no books or other sources that can cite these facts without making readers look through that many match scorecards? The early part seems quite good, if heavy on cricket jargon. I'll try to come back and read it more closely later, but it may be a few days before I return due to a heavy real-life workload. Giants2008 ( 17-14) 03:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Here is how that might look in this article. The only problem then is in using the individual citations more than once, but a bit of creative thinking should be able to get around this. Steve T • C 08:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply
<ref><br />
Smith, Jones, [http://www.smith.com The Smith Report], published by Smith Enterprises on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.<br />
Brown, Thomas, [http://www.jones.com The Jones Report], published by Jones Family Corp on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.<br />
Banks, Steve, [http://www.banks.com The Banks Report], published by Banks and Company on 31 October, 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2007.
</ref>
There is nothing too major in all of that and happy to support when addressed. The string of refs may require a technical fix. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 09:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Brianboulton ( talk) 10:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC) reply