Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
@Levivich:I think that either way the statements are over-referenced. I understand why you undid, but I think the actualbetter improvement would be to reduce the number of references used for each statement; I was trying to demonstrate which were used more to assist in that cleanup. —Ost (talk) 14:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the version at Special:Permalink/1234862825, the only ref that seems overcited to me is #2 (five cites). I'm not sure which of those five cites support all the details in that sentence, but yeah, that could be reduced from five to two or three since the content is no longer particularly new or controversial. The other bundles seem to me to have good reason for multiple cites. Levivich (talk) 14:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Levivich:Thanks for the understanding and analysis; I appreciate this discussion with you. Admittedly, I tend to prefer to have the individual references unbundled and used on the parts of the statements that they validate instead of all at the end of the lines. My general rationale is that sentences can get split without editors checking which of the bundled references is used for each part of the sentence, and thus the refs can eventually end up with the wrong sentences. As this is a recent and prominent topic with experienced editors like yourself watching it, I will not edit this page in that manner as the scrutiny should help prevent such problems. —Ost (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]