Question

Am I wrong in thinking that inline citations should not be placed in sources?

Comments

Inline citations do not belong in sources.  In making an inline citation, the citation will appear under sources by itself due to the the ref tags and the reference displayer.

---

duplicate question: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/627687/should-inline-citations-and-sources-list-same-information

---

please close this question

---

Actually, I need an example to show what I mean.  The cited source itself, under the Sources heading, has information inside reference tags so that you see the bracketed numbers. 

Below is one I changed, but sometimes I am challenged when I do so and wanted more information.

== Sources ==

<references />

* Clue source: Find a Grave Memorial for Thomas SALMONS in Thomas Salmons Cemetery, Martin, Floyd County, Kentucky.<ref>Find A Grave, database (http://www.findagrave.com : accessed 16 April 2017), memorial page for Thomas Sammons (date of birth and death listed as unknown), Find a Grave Memorial no. 153,350,078, citing Thomas Salmons Cemetery, Martin, Floyd County, Kentucky; no tombstone picture.<ref>www.findagrave.com/memorial/153350078</ref></ref>

In this example, not only has an inline citation been used with a source, but it is a nested inline citation. 

Mary

---

Ah, yes, in order to "footnote" the Sources section, make sure the <references/> line is below all the <ref> tags -- in other words, put it at the very bottom of the page.

Most people take the recommendation to put the <references/> tag below the Sources line too literally, placing it immediately on the next line. But I disagree and like to have my footnotes to be at the bottom of the page, rather than in between the Sources headline and the actual sources.

---

oh, and the nested <ref>...text...<ref>...text...</ref></ref> won't work.

---

But in this example, the attempt to footnote a source, seems redundant and unnecessary.

---

I disagree with putting the <references/> tag at the very foot of the page.  It is there so that sources are shown, not footnotes.  There used to be a ==Footnotes== section, but there isn't any longer, because of policy change.  So you need to put it directly under the ==Sources== heading, because it will be listing sources.

Answer 1

Lots of WikiTreers include inline citations which reference the best sources we can find from reliable, credible sources, and sometimes do include page numbers providing reference to a particular specific fact of relevance. I actually prefer this method of referencing when doing genealogical research--especially when including a "Research Notes" section on a particularly puzzling profile page--since the inline citation notes allow me to show sources pointing in different directions quite specifically.  I also love to include inline citations so anyone visiting the profiles I've worked on can tell why I think that some of the facts I'm calling factual appear that way to me.  So if and when other facts may arise, it's easier to compare source to source, thanks to inline citations.

Yet another time I prefer to see inline citations on WikiTree profile pages is when many good biographical sources are available for a meaty biography section. I love to know which stories and anecdotes come from which books, articles and magazines at the end of each sentence summarizing them.

Comments

I too like inline sources, Cynthia, but the question was not about inline sources in the bio text - it was about nesting inline sources inside of sources in the source list. Which I agree is definitely not a good idea.

---

Good catch!  Putting inline sources inside of sources is an iteration that literally does not even occur to me as 'something to do' so I was blind to that being what this question is all about.

Answer 2

An inline citation can merely be a reference to a particular fact.

Whereas the actual source listing can provide much more detail.