Forum:CT Archive/The "Sources" section

Forums &gt; Consensus track &gt; 

Keeping the "Appearances" and "Sources" section separate looks silly, and I feel this should be changed. Hence the consensus track thread and all. I'll explain my proposal in simple, short terms to avoid misunderstandings. --Imp 17:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * '''How does the whole "Appearances" deal work today?"
 * In-universe material is put under the "Appearances" header of an article. Reference material is put under "Sources."


 * What's wrong with that?
 * Not only does excessive sectioning look silly in short articles; the "Sources" section today simply means "mentioned in this reference book," which I feel does not warrant a separate section.


 * What are you proposing?
 * It's all very simple: make "Sources" a subsection of "Appearances" under the header "Reference material."


 * What? Could you please explain using wikicode?
 * Most certainly. Today we use the following:

==Appearances==
 * Darth Vader's Funky Adventures

Reference material

 * Funky Adventures Sourcebook


 * I still don't understand. Could I see this proposal at work in an article?
 * Yes! I have formatted the "Appearances" section of the Lando Calrissian article to comply with my proposal. You can check it out by clicking here.

That should do it. Now, commence the voting for this modification of the Manual of Style.

Adopt proposal

 * 1) Imp 17:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)