Formatting is not easy. I have seen where people try to copy and paste in coding and then work within already written coding. To make this work you have to be able to find existing already formatted code. And you have to hope it is correct as there are evidently codes out there that have been replaced or discontinued.
So, I would suggest that the pre-1500 project create and publish categories or templates you would like us to use. This takes the guess work out of formats. And it can prompt the contributors to think in terms of desired formats.
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Sources
I finally found this under Wikitree help...
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Pre-1500_Profiles
Example: Create a template for sources. (Yes I know it is not preferred but maybe there are times like pre-1500 where it might make more sense)
Books and other published printed materials:
Internet sources:
Interviews with time period experts (give name of expert, their qualifications like PHD, chair of University of x, history department interviewed by x on specify date
Official documents and where they currently reside:
Theories in Conflict: (for many historical figures there are at times conflicting opinions among historians this is where you should put these opposing viewpoints an example might be a book commissioned by the family on a noble vs a book on peerage vs statements made in charters or other legal documents of the time which can create alternate family affiliations)
Family retained memorabilia and its location: (I for example have copies and original source materials including letters, research notes of ancestors sometimes 4 centuries or more old)
You may have other ideas, but this is a format I have used with other researchers for a while now. We find the theories in conflict to be very important because sometimes you get some very contentious discussions about if a source is acceptable or not
If you number the sources then in the bio you can indicate the source number to conserve space and this takes the place of what I find to be cumbersome inline sources.
You can do the same for the biography section.
An example of hard to find things for users... try to find a project page for pre-1500.
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Projects I see a link for pre-1700 buried in verbiage at the top.. or
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Projects
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Free-Space_Projects
If there is a pre-1500 shared project page we could put directions there.
I would suggest that for some profiles linking a free space page might be the way to go, and directions on when and how to do that could be on a pre-1500 project page.
I would also suggest that on a page like this known fraudulent sources be listed. Not everyone with a pre-1500s badge is a historian and may not realize they are using a source that has been discredited (example is look at the creation and inclusion of a 7th wife for Henry VIII on wikitree)
OH, and I more thought. We define some kind of coding to identify
a. Mythological characters (they are now in wikitree)
b. Non Verified family members (I have one in my wikitree line because she is a possible daughter or perhaps a cousin of the line... and there is no clear source found yet that clears up her actual affiliation. I say this in her bio section but it would be great if at the top by the name some kind of icon or phrase could show up that says Not Verified.
c. Define when we think someone is verified or not In my opinion one source does not create verification but sometimes you have one person state something that is wrong and then multiple authors pick it up and by common use it becomes the accepted belief even though it is wrong. We have a situation like that right now for Jacob Stenger which became Stanger when the family came to the Colonial US. We have a team of international researchers led by Dr Luc Stenger who have proved (we have birth records, emmigration and immigration records, hand writing analysis, and local historian testaments) that prove this family came from Wingen Sur Moder not Dornhagen as so many books and websites assert. These kind of situations abound with pre-1700 and pre-1500 beliefs.
Ok, I am off my soapbox... thanks for letting me vent a little.
