This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
This is a good start to this page. However, as it is about archaeology, I would like to change the sourcing to sfn in line with Harvard referencing. This will also make it easier to edit the page text as it won't be cluttered with citation templates. Any objections? Sirfurboyđ (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My personal preference is not to use it and leave them as they are. If you think it's better for the page then go ahead. Titus Gold (talk) 11:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I don't want to force an unwanted style, but I do think there are good reasons to use sfn or harv on an archaeology page, and that is because Harvard referencing is very widely expected and used in the field, and because the subject here is more academic then, say, biographies or pages about towns etc. Shorter footnotes also keep page source much clearer and massively cut down on duplicate citations. They place all the sources in a proper bibliography. Against it is that it creates a shortened reference list that then links to a bibliography, that some people dislike. Sirfurboyđ (talk) 20:39, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have converted to sfn. Take a look to see if you are okay with that. Sirfurboyđ (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
