I disagree with your interpretation, Lucy.
What we call sources could be called items in a source list, bibliography, or works cited.
On WikiTree we put them beneath the references and a line that says "See also:".
Sources in this list should always be complete citations, while the references that refer to them can be abbreviated.
This list can contain web pages, books, and other sources where more information about the person can be found, whether or not they were specifically consulted as sources.
Ideally, this list is organized in alphabetical order, by the name of the author, editor, compiler, or translator (in that order of precedence), and by title if no information is given on authorship of the source. This ordering needs to be done manually and it's not generally a priority.
The Sources headline should always be a level two, i.e. == Sources ==. On very early profiles you may see it as a level three, i.e. === Sources ===. This should be fixed when you see it.
What we call references could be called citations, reference notes, inline references, footnotes, or endnotes.
A reference provides a source for a specific statement in the text. Ideally every fact related to a person has a reference.
The same source is often used multiple times to support different facts. Instructions for doing this are on the Sources page.
A reference may include a page number or section while the source list item describes the entire work.
A reference may include annotations, i.e. discussion or analysis of the cited source. Alternatively, a reference note may simply be an explanatory note and not a source citation at all.
References are automatically listed in the sequence that they are used in the text. This happens in place of the <references /> tag in the markup.
Since text may be rearranged, references should never be manually numbered, and you should not use terms like "ibid."
There should be no "Footnotes" or other headline above the references. You will see this on some older profiles because it used to be the default style.