Talk:7th FedCom RCT

Revision as of 11:11, 13 July 2009 by Revanche (talk | contribs) (Help:References)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This article is within the scope of the Military Commands WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki's coverage of articles on military units. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article has been flagged for review by the Project: Military Commands team. If you have reviewed this article, please remove the tr parameter from this template.

Can I ask whats wrong with it? I'm now working on the 5th Fedcom and want to know so improvements can be incoporated.— The preceding unsigned comment was provided by Stormlion1 (talkcontribs) 22:49, 8 July 2009.

Testing, Testing, 1,2,3 Stormlion1 04:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Grammar. It's a lot better than I thought it was when I was bleary-eyed last night. --Scaletail 23:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
If I might make a suggestion, beyond more tagging, probably break up the FedCom Civil War (sourcebook) references. Provide a separate ref tag for each page/group of pages, you've clearly noted the pages, and its why the ref tag you've got was named FCCW1, because it was the first mention/page of the 8th FedCom RCT in the book and so on. Cyc 00:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I was trying to put ref tags once per paragraph, mostly for ease while typing as I find refrences first, list them, so I don't have to constantly look up page numbers there already at the bottom of each paragraph. Stormlion1 03:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no way for you to have known of a policy, because it hasn't really been written in one place yet, but separated in various discussions throughout the site. The ideal article would have the ref marks behind each relevant sentence(s), with the the specific page numbers for that fact. The <references /> tag would be placed under the ==References== section, which would cause all refs to show up. I think your way of doing it is a step better than only listing the title at the bottom, but it would still need to be copyedited by an Editor who seeks out that level of conformity for the articles (like myself). At the least, you've given that follow-on Editor the pages he needs to find the appropriate ref, so he can fix it. Lastly, there is no need to repeat the title by itself, if you've properly ref'ed it in the article itself. (Ex: TacOps, pp. 133-134 would mean TacOps would not need to be listed again by itself.) When a book is listed down there, its because it hasn't yet been properly ref'ed in the article.
Take a look at Draconis Combine to see how refs are individually used, both within and following paragraphs. Thanks for showing interest in improving articles you adopt, Stormlion1. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 04:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Created the Help:References page, which should help guide you now, Stormlion. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)