Talk:Liexian Zhuan

Reformatting
Hi thanks for your contributions to this article. However, changing the original inline citation mode to footnotes goes against the spirit of WP:CITEVAR. I hope we can figure out a way to change the format back without losing your work. What's the best way to proceed? This problem came up on another article that I started, and we were able to replace {{sfnp with {{harvcol, but that doesn't seem to work well here. Please let me know your thoughts. Keahapana (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. =)


 * As we've already discussed elsewhere, inline citations are simply inferior in a digital medium. You had previously already acknowledged my arguments on the topic but, since you've forgotten them and are still defending inline citations, I'll rehash. You are certainly welcome to invoke {{sc|citevar}} to reformat the page back and I certainly won't edit war over the format alone but, apart from {{sc|a}} the vastly improved readability and {{sc|b}} proper treatment of dating, {{sc|c}} this allows automated formatting linking directly to the cited material. {{sc|d}} It also allows better formatting for links to online sources and {{sc|e}} permits the page numbers in the cited works to be directly linked easily and only once in the code, as opposed to omitted entirely or repeated with each citation. Ideally, you're right: there should be some preferences setting that would allow you to convert the citation formatting for printing (where, yes, inline citation is debatably preferable), but that's not something to address here. — Llywelyn II   07:32, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've found several good sources that I'll add. Best wishes, Keahapana (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)