Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:C (programming language)/Archive 17) (bot |
|||
Line 63:
:I have no objections at all, and would prefer to have either all long or all short (either is fine), but not the random mix there is now. I am currently trying to untangle the THREE sources to the 1993 Ritchie paper, but stepped away for the moment because {{t|cite Q}} is annoying me. I was also thinking the {{t|harvtxt}}s should be {{t|efn}}s, but hadn't started focusing on that yet. [[User:Elrondil|Elrondil]] ([[User talk:Elrondil|talk]]) 02:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::While the Ritchie source it is a very, very good paper, I totally agree, three refs to it is a little over-the-top.😁 <br/>Ok, given this approbation, and unless someone objects in the next 24h or so, I'll remove the Sources section, and change the Ritchie refs etc. to <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki>s. [[User:Chumpih|<span style="text-shadow: 2px 2.5px 3px #448811bb">Chumpih</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Chumpih|t]]</sup> 06:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
:::Ah, @[[User:Elrondil|Elrondil]], I note that some of the <nowiki>{{harvtxt}}</nowiki> links have been changed to {<nowiki />{efn}}s with <nowiki>{{sfnp}}</nowiki> references [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=C_(programming_language)&diff=prev&oldid=1295367058 HERE] and similar. Are we still OK to remove the ''Sources'' section, the {<nowiki />{Cite Q}}s, and move to more typical {<nowiki />{cite}}s? [[User:Chumpih|<span style="text-shadow: 2px 2.5px 3px #448811bb">Chumpih</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Chumpih|t]]</sup> 06:19, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
:But what are "standard Cites"? 😀 There is no such thing in Wikipedia and everyone does what they want anyway. [[User:Elrondil|Elrondil]] ([[User talk:Elrondil|talk]]) 02:58, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::Ah, true, true! [[User:Chumpih|<span style="text-shadow: 2px 2.5px 3px #448811bb">Chumpih</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Chumpih|t]]</sup> 06:39, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
| |||