On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:17 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/10/2010 19:43, geni wrote: >> >> The Wikipedia that went from nothing to top ten site was never built >> on verifiable knowledge. It was built on what people happened to have >> in their heads. The whole citation thing outside the more >> controversial areas came later. Don't believe me? This was a featured >> article: >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_James_Bulger&oldid=3191413 >> > > Have you looked at the current version of that page? Every sentence has > at least one ref, it looks like a spider has fallen into an ink well and > then run backwards and forwards across the page. Typographically the > result is a mess and almost unreadable with great gaps between one word > and the next. I'd be amazed if there weren't less than a dozen sources > that cover the entire sorry affair and each paragraph covered by 1 > reference. 100 different references smacks of OCD.
Inline references can be very distracting when reading. Here is a quick fix http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:John_Vandenberg/vector.css The IE workaround "filter: alpha(opacity=50);" isn't working for me. -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
