User:J. Johnson/Citation primer

This is a quick primer on how to cite sources at Wikipedia. It is not a comprehensive reference to citation, it does not even mention some popular alternatives. It is intended as a straight-forward, uncomplicated guide to citation, and in a manner that avoids many of the pitfalls that often make citation so difficult.

We start with a reminder: Wikipedia is built on sources, and particularly reliable sources. Citation is the documentation of those sources. Material that is not cited to reliable sources is subject to deletion. So it is very important to get this citation stuff right. Note that web pages, blogs, and such are generally NOT considered reliable sources, and a mere URL to any source is NOT a proper citation.

Proper citation starts with your research, and particularly in recording the source, and precise location within the source (e.g., page number), of every point or quote you note. It would be tedious to write out a full bibliographic citation for every note, so standard practice is to list each source once and in full in a master list, and then, in your notes, use a shortened reference, such as the last name of the author(s) and date of the source. The same approach is used in an article: short reference in the text leads to a list in the "References" section, which has the complete information for finding the source and distinguishing it from similar sources. Various books can be consulted if you have any questions about this; see WP:Manual of Style for a list.

List of references
Let's start by building a list of references (bibliography). A good place to do this is in the "Sandbox" on your user page. Use real data if you have it, else just make up some.

Bibliographies present a lot of information in a condensed style, which is highly dependent on standardized conventions of presentation, including ordering of elements and formatting. Unfortunately, there are many such "standardized" conventions (each with fervent supporters). Rather than getting tangled up in stylistic issues, and wrestling with the tedious details of formatting each reference, use a citation template. The details of the reference are given to the template as parameters, and the wiki software will do all the fancy stuff automagically. So, in your Sandbox (or wherever you are doing this), and possibly in a new section named "References" or "Works consulted" or some such, copy in the following lines:

Hit the "Show preview" button under your edit box and you should get the following.

Cool, eh? The point of the demonstration is to show that while there is a lot going on here, in using a template you do not have to sweat the details.

Now try your hand with some of your own sources. For any books you have, copy in the following blank template, and add the details. Up to eight authors can be included. Delete any lines you don't need.

For an article in a journal replace the publisher, edition, and isbn lines with:
 * issue =
 * page =
 * doi =
 * url =

A small problem to watch out for: parameters don't like multiple lines. Eventually you will copy in something (most likely a long article title) with embedded "newline" characters, and it blows up. These characters are non-visible, but examination will reveal where they are, and a judicious backspace fixes the problem.

The format and order of parameters is flexible. As the "official" versions of published articles are usually behind a publisher's "pay wall"; the url here is for locating more accessible copies on the Internet. Details of additional parameters and examples for other kinds of sources can be seen at citation, but for now let's keep it simple.

The citation template normally generates a suitable reference label for the reference by concatenating the last name of each author and the year. However, where there are more than three authors, or complications with a name, or certain other complications, I suggest specifying the reference label explicity. E.g.: |ref = CITEREFSmithothers1981

There are complications using "et al."; use "others" instead. If you have a problem with links failing, use your browser's ability to view the "page source": the CITEREF tags are readily found and checked. The problem is usually some trivial typo, or non-matching dates.

Fill in a few templates for your sources, then see how they look in Preview.