Correcting the References/Discussion Templates Instructions

[Wokistan]

On the topic of references within parentheses, it should be noted that this is just what you're supposed to do according to several of the major style guides I can find. Control+f "footnotes" on the links.

APA does it.

MLA does it. (control+F for "Placement of more than one note in a sentence." to find it)

Chicago Style does it.

Wikipedia does it.

Engineers do it.

I'm not really able to find notable study guides that don't put references inside parentheses. They seem to all agree that references should be outside of other punctuation but inside parentheses, and this is probably why so many people are thrown off that the site policy isn't to do that. They're unconsciously used to seeing it done this way everywhere else so it looks weird when we don't. I think it makes more sense for us to behave in accordance to the major english language style guides and put them inside.

 

[Just_a_Random_Butler]

On the topic of references within parentheses, it should be noted that this is just what you're supposed to do according to several of the major style guides I can find. Control+f "footnotes" on the links.

APA does it.

MLA does it. (control+F for "Placement of more than one note in a sentence." to find it)

Chicago Style does it.

Wikipedia does it.

Engineers do it.

I'm not really able to find notable study guides that don't put references inside parentheses. They seem to all agree that references should be outside of other punctuation but inside parentheses, and this is probably why so many people are thrown off that the site policy isn't to do that. They're unconsciously used to seeing it done this way everywhere else so it looks weird when we don't. I think it makes more sense for us to behave in accordance to the major english language style guides and put them inside.

I wanted to address the issue of the proper way to include references in the thread initiated by Agnaa. His examples suggested treating parentheses the same as other punctuation when adding references, but I had some reservations. I'm glad this discussion is moving in the right direction.

What you said really made sense to me. I have been looking for a standard practice, and your argument aligns with the major English language style guides. I believe following the widely accepted standard of placing references inside parentheses would also be the best approach.

Also, Ant seems to be waiting for Agnaa's input, but I'm unsure if he's able to comment here given his level of activity.

 

[Damage3245]

Just because other sites such as Wikipedia does it that way doesn't man we should adopt that style.

 

[Wokistan]

Given that MLA, APA and Chicago style combined are pretty much the only ways you see things cited in english outside of wikipedia and some technical guides, I think that those all doing something actually does mean we should adopt that style. No real reason with us to be randomly asynchronous with the rest of the english language.

 

[Antvasima]

On the topic of references within parentheses, it should be noted that this is just what you're supposed to do according to several of the major style guides I can find. Control+f "footnotes" on the links.

APA does it.

MLA does it. (control+F for "Placement of more than one note in a sentence." to find it)

Chicago Style does it.

Wikipedia does it.

Engineers do it.

I'm not really able to find notable study guides that don't put references inside parentheses. They seem to all agree that references should be outside of other punctuation but inside parentheses, and this is probably why so many people are thrown off that the site policy isn't to do that. They're unconsciously used to seeing it done this way everywhere else so it looks weird when we don't. I think it makes more sense for us to behave in accordance to the major english language style guides and put them inside.

I wanted to address the issue of the proper way to include references in the thread initiated by Agnaa. His examples suggested treating parentheses the same as other punctuation when adding references, but I had some reservations. I'm glad this discussion is moving in the right direction.

What you said really made sense to me. I have been looking for a standard practice, and your argument aligns with the major English language style guides. I believe following the widely accepted standard of placing references inside parentheses would also be the best approach.

Also, Ant seems to be waiting for Agnaa's input, but I'm unsure if he's able to comment here given his level of activity.

Given that MLA, APA and Chicago style combined are pretty much the only ways you see things cited in english outside of wikipedia and some technical guides, I think that those all doing something actually does mean we should adopt that style. No real reason with us to be randomly asynchronous with the rest of the english language.

I agree with applying this official standard as well.

 

[Antvasima]

On the topic of references within parentheses, it should be noted that this is just what you're supposed to do according to several of the major style guides I can find. Control+f "footnotes" on the links.

APA does it.

MLA does it. (control+F for "Placement of more than one note in a sentence." to find it)

Chicago Style does it.

Wikipedia does it.

Engineers do it.

I'm not really able to find notable study guides that don't put references inside parentheses. They seem to all agree that references should be outside of other punctuation but inside parentheses, and this is probably why so many people are thrown off that the site policy isn't to do that. They're unconsciously used to seeing it done this way everywhere else so it looks weird when we don't. I think it makes more sense for us to behave in accordance to the major english language style guides and put them inside.

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Celestial_Pegasus @Ultima_Reality @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X

Would you be willing to provide input here please?

 

[Damage3245]

I misunderstood Wokistan's post the first time I read it.


I agree that references should go inside the brackets, not outside them. I stated my position on that earlier in the thread.

I'm pretty sure this is the case in most profiles I'm familiar with anyway.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the evaluation.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I agree that references should go inside the brackets, not outside them. I stated my position on that earlier in the thread.

I'm pretty sure this is the case in most profiles I'm familiar with anyway.

My thoughts as well.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I think it's better too

 

[Propellus]

I still prefer references being inside parenthesis too as them being outside of them doesn't really make sense to me

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I am fine with those brackets yeah.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Celestial_Pegasus @Ultima_Reality @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X

Would you be willing to provide input here please?

Yeah like, I agree wholeheartedly with Wok. It's so weird we don't put references within parentheses.

 

[Just_a_Random_Butler]

Bumping this.

I would like to point out that I have adjusted the objective of the thread so that it aligns with the proposals made by Wokistan, rather than the sample suggested by Agnaa.

However, I believe that more input is still necessary due to the significance of the change. To keep track of what everyone thinks, I have compiled a list of people who either concur, dissent, or have yet to express their stance on the matter. So far, everyone is in agreement.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @Celestial_Pegasus @Ultima_Reality @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Shadowbokunohero @Crazylatin77 @Zaratthustra @ElixirBlue @Nehz_XZX @Dereck03 @Agnaa @JustSomeWeirdo @Theglassman12 @Crabwhale @Eficiente @DarkGrath @Moritzva @DemonGodMitchAubin @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @Armorchompy @CrimsonStarFallen @Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer @LordTracer @Emirp sumitpo @Lonkitt @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Therefir @DMUA @Jasonsith @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @KLOL506 @M3X_2.0 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings @Dalesean027 @DemiiPowa @The_Divine_Phoenix @ZackMoon1234 @Dark-Carioca @MistaClean @MonkeyOfLife @FinePoint

Your input here would be very appreciated.

 

[Damage3245]

Does there need to be any more discussion on it?

 

[LordTracer]

I think I’ve already made my stance clear, references should go inside of parentheses.

 

[Antvasima]

Does there need to be any more discussion on it?

Well, more confirmations would be preferable.

 

[CloverDragon03]

I agree with this. References should be inside parenthesis but outside punctuation marks

 

[Dereck03]

I had already agreed with the old proposal, the new one works as well.

 

[Dalesean027]

Yeah I agree to that as well plus it looks better

 

[Firestorm808]

As Wokistan suggested, we should adhere to reputable study guides and place references outside of most punctuation marks but within parentheses.

The above is what I've been doing, so I have no issues with it.

 

[Crabwhale]

Fairly certain I agreed with the other thread but yes, even before Wok brought it up this has always been how I implemented them. Agreed.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you to everybody who responded to thIs thread.

I think that we have sufficient amounts of staff agreements to apply this revision now.

 

[Eficiente]

I agree with refs being within parentheses, but not outside of most punctuation marks if obligatorily so. I was going to make a thread about it one day. I really think that this was a custom that became too popular and standardized before people could question its practicality.

My issue against it is simple; if you put a ref after a punctuation mark, that's gonna be a bit more annoying to deal with if you later decide to continue that sentence (ie remove the punctuation mark and keep on writing there), like if you do so naturally or if you choose to remove the sentence from there to put it elsewhre in a page. Meanwhile if you put the ref before the punctuation mark it changes nothings but removes that issue.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

I agree with this. References should be inside parenthesis but outside punctuation marks

Hop agrees.

 

[Antvasima]

Is it acceptable to place references after parentheses, in direct conjunction with the connected relevant statements, rather than wait until the end of long sentences, for example?

If that is not standard encyclopaedic praxis we should not use it though.

 

[Abstractions]

We should probably adhere to what is considered standard, as Wokistan has pointed out.

 

[Antvasima]

So is somebody willing and able to properly apply what has been accepted here?

 

[Just_a_Random_Butler]

I apologize for the delay. The changes that we talked about here have been added to the page.

 

[Antvasima]

No problem at all. Thanks a lot for helping out.

So what currently needs to be done here then?

 

[Just_a_Random_Butler]

No problem at all. Thanks a lot for helping out.

So what currently needs to be done here then?

I don't think there's anything left to do here so I believe that it is safe to close the thread.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will do so then. Thank you to everybody who helped out here.