 Mircea Eliade, are 418 footnotes enough? |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |
| thekohser |
 Thu 26th March 2009, 2:01pm
Post
#1
|
|
Member  Group: Regulars Posts: 10,274 Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm Member No.: 911  |
The article about [[Mircea Eliade]] has more footnotes (418) than the article about George W. Bush, the Iraq War, Barack Obama, or even Roman Catholic Church.
What do you suppose is the story behind such an obsessive effort to cite this particular article? |
   |
 
|
| LaraLove |
Thu 26th March 2009, 2:23pm
Post
#2
|
 Wikipedia BLP advocate Group: Regulars Posts: 1,741 Joined: Mon 28th Jan 2008, 7:53pm Member No.: 4,627 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 26th March 2009, 10:01am)  The article about [[Mircea Eliade]] has more footnotes (418) than the article about George W. Bush, the Iraq War, Barack Obama, or even Roman Catholic Church. What do you suppose is the story behind such an obsessive effort to cite this particular article? There is a lot of duplication, so there's probably significantly less than 418. Perhaps someone was hoping to go for GA of FA and thought it best to source everything. Alternatively, the article was written by someone who bothered to go to the library first, and just sourced as they wrote, which is really the best method. |
|
|
|
| carbuncle |
Thu 26th March 2009, 5:32pm
Post
#3
|
 Fat Cat Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544 |
I'm sorely tempted to rename the section "Portrayals, filmography and dramatizations" to "Mircea Eliade in popular culture" and add a few Simpsons and Power Rangers references.
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
Thu 26th March 2009, 5:55pm
Post
#4
|
 Can't actually moderate Group: Moderators Posts: 11,814 Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 |
The heavy use of footnoting in article was done mostly by Dahn (T-C-L-K-R-D)
, a Romanian WP'er, and presumably the huge number of footnotes are meant to intimidate anyone who might try to remove or "soften" material in the article linking Eliade with pre-war Romanian fascism and anti-semitism.
There was a period during 2005-2006 when Romanians were causing enormous problems for Wikipedia - as I recall, there had been some articles (more likely op-eds) in the Romanian press claiming that WP was, essentially, anti-Romanian. This caused numerous Romanian editors, many of them barely able to write in English, to register on WP and try to gain control of Romania-related articles. (They showed up on Uncyclopedia too, actually.) If Dahn was one of them, he was clearly one of the more English-fluent ones, at least! This quote is from an earlier version of Dahn's user page: QUOTE This user declares his annoyance at browsing through articles innitiated by US or UK users that fail to mention that the theme has to do with one of the two countries, arguably because they assume that English language wiki means English/American wiki. |
|
|
|
| Chris Croy |
Sat 28th March 2009, 10:23pm
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Contributors Posts: 128 Joined: Thu 7th Jun 2007, 6:57pm Member No.: 1,650 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
If you've got too many citations, you are an obsessive freak with something to hide. If you haven't got enough citations, you are clearly an anonymous vandal libeling someone with the power of the Wikipedia Hate Machine.
|
|
|
|
| Jacina |
Mon 6th April 2009, 11:44am
Post
#6
|
|
Junior Member Group: Contributors Posts: 57 Joined: Mon 31st Mar 2008, 7:47am Member No.: 5,555 |
So... what we need is the formula for the perfect amount of footnotes?
How does that go? Lines / 10 +1? Or something  |
|
|
|
| Son of a Yeti |
Mon 6th April 2009, 11:48am
Post
#7
|
 High altitude member Group: Regulars Posts: 415 Joined: Sun 26th Oct 2008, 3:30pm From: A hiding place in the Himalaya Member No.: 8,704 |
QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 28th March 2009, 3:23pm) If you've got too many citations, you are an obsessive freak with something to hide. If you haven't got enough citations, you are clearly an anonymous vandal libeling someone with the power of the Wikipedia Hate Machine. And if you have the right number of citations, you must be someone's sockpuppet. It means banhammer in every case.  This post has been edited by Son of a Yeti: Mon 6th April 2009, 11:48am |
|
|
|
| Jon Awbrey |
Mon 6th April 2009, 11:50am
Post
#8
|
 τὰ δέ μοι παθήματα μαθήματα γέγονε Group: Moderators Posts: 6,738 Joined: Sun 6th Apr 2008, 4:52am From: Meat Puppet Nation Member No.: 5,619 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Jacina @ Mon 6th April 2009, 7:44am) So … what we need is the formula for the perfect amount of footnotes? How does that go? Lines÷10 + 1? Or something The question that folks should be asking here is not how many footnotes, but — Why are these Wikipediot CiteBorgs imposing a style of footnoting that was already being deprecated for use in research papers some 40 or 50 years ago? Jon Awbrey |
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd 5 13, 5:07am |