- Is her name that contriversial that it needs to have a citation in the lead? Couldn't her full name be listed in the first instance in the main body and cited there instead?陣内Jinnai 08:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It's for the "Marie" portion, which is only in one episode.
- Is it something that needs a citation in the lead? Can you not find a way to incorporate that into the body and move the citation there? Or is it something that there is a contriversy over, ie fan or others disagree with her middle name (or if she has one)?陣内Jinnai 00:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It's for users who haven't seen the episode, and assume it must just be vandalism (and believe me, they exist). Does the citation hurt anything?
- Per WP:LEADCITE "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers.... ...the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads.
basically, if you are stating that
- There is no place to put her full name in the body of the article where it can be cited OR
- it has been constantly challenged with good faith questioning about her middle name...
- ...that is fine. However, even if that is the case per WP:CITE#Inline citations it should probably be placed at the end of the sentence. I don't think her middle name is that contentious.陣内Jinnai 02:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, both of those fit, so thanks for justifying it for me. -- Scorpion0422 03:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, then at least move it after some punctuation like a comma or period.陣内Jinnai 04:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There are a lot of excess wikilinks that link to the same article. Every time an episode is mentioned. For example, whether it's been linked to before it is linked to again. You should remove a lot of those duplicate links.
- Why? It's not like everyone who looks at these will be completely familiar with the episodes, so the links help provide quick reference.
- Which is why 1 wikilink is enough, unless there is a clear reason for it, which I haven't seen. That line of reasoning can be used for almost everything on Wikipedia.陣内Jinnai 00:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I've never seen the point in opposing over something like wikilinks. They are there to help with navigation, so who does it hurt if some a repeated a few times? After all, does it hurt to make it navigation easy?
- Having lots of unnecessary links hinders navigation because high-value links get lost among the many repeated, low-value links. Ucucha 01:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Couldn't have said it better.陣内Jinnai 02:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- But we're not talking about a tonne of duplicate links, just a few episode, source and season links. It's not like Homer is linked once every paragraph. -- Scorpion0422 03:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I changed my mind, just doing it is easier than arguing with you. I removed every duplicate link within the body of the actual article (not taking refs or infobox into account). -- Scorpion0422 03:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|