Talk:Community Wishlist/W155

Thank you for your submission

Hello Minilexikon, thank you for sharing this problem with us. We will get back to you if we have any questions. In the meantime, there is a wish that also touches on the placement of citations, you might want to check out. –– STei (WMF) (talk) 15:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Added to a focus area

Hello everyone and Minilexikon, this wish has been added to the Reference Management focus area. Please note that grouping wishes into focus areas allows for a focused/centralised discussion on a problem area. Whatever comments of support or disagreement or further discussion you have about this problem space, please leave it on the talk page. You can also show support for the focus area on the area's page, the support button is at the bottom. –– STei (WMF) (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Multiple references challenge

For individual references, this feature would be amazing, but when multiple sources exist and backup multiple aspects...how can this help further source integrity instead of continuing the ambiguity?

1 reference: Example unsourced claims...<verified>backed up with data</verified>

2 references: Example unsourced claims...<verified id=1><verified id=2>partially verified by one source, but not all of it is verified by second source</verified></verified>

Shushugah (talk) 05:24, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. And even trickier if you have, say, a list of 6 items and have three sources that collectively vouch for the list, but each one alone only has four or five. It is tedious enough to do the level of citation precision currently expected by the major-language Wikipedias, which already far exceeds the precision expected in academia. - Jmabel (talk) 07:23, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

To be fair, 6-sources should not be used but the best two sources. Shushugah (talk) 14:20, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose

This won't work. And it would make wikitext barely readable and editing harder than it currently is.

Like this?:

<reference source="source six">Fulfilled direction use continual set him propriety continued. Saw met applauded favourite deficient engrossed <reference source="source seven">concealed</reference> and her. <reference source="source one"><reference source="source two">Concluded boy perpetual old supposing. Farther related bed and <reference source="source three">passage comfort</reference> <reference source="source four">civilly.</reference> Dashwoods see frankness objection abilities the. As hastened oh produced prospect formerly up am. Placing forming nay looking old married few has. Margaret disposed add screened rendered six say his striking confined.</reference></reference></reference>

I suggest this is archived because it's not feasible. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:40, 27 February 2026 (UTC)