This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Dave, do I take it that this article will not be expanded from your recent edit, i.e. removing the citation tag? And if it is to be expanded, it will containe only one source? Articles must be referenced, as you know, and tags should only be removed when citations have been requested. I may of course be wrong, and in that case, could you post a link for the relavent policy on this, thanking you in advance, regards --Domer48 10:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Everything on the article page as it stands at present can be found in the source provided, which is exemplary. That does not mean it cannot be expanded further with new sources provided. There is no Wikipedia requirement to provide umpteen different sources which all say the same thing. If this were an article which had contentious comment, it might requre some alternative source material, but that is not the case here. Maybe you should have a look at some other WP articles such as Francisco Franco where very many seriously contentious and heresay things are up on the page without any obvious citations. David Lauder 12:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I see what you mean, re article, but is there not section tags there for that? Rather than tagging the whole article which has considerable referneces. You are quite right though about not having to provide umpteen different sources, but I consider the ones that are there should be referenced? This could after all, be cited by some editors as a precedent, and then we would have policies coming out left right and centre. And since it is only one source Since the article is not contentious, and the article being small, surly it could be done quite easly? Thanks --Domer48 12:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
