User:Bawolff/sandbox/alt citations

This is an experiment at a modified system of specifying sources. Currently We have a section at end of for sources. This is quite different from how wikipedia does sources which uses superscripts (aka [1]) that link to notes section at bottom. It has been generally felt by the wikinews community that such use of inline citations in news articles is inappropriate for various reasons. Considering the length of wikinews articles, this has been fine. We don't need to have each line have specifically which source it came from beside it. However now that some wikinews articles have became larger, incorporating lots of sources [which is a good thing], it has become more difficult to check the sources of some articles. (or at least i perceive that they are. this is all imho).

This is an attempt at perhaps making things easier by using a hybrid of the wikipedia inline sourcing system and the non-inline wikinews model. Consider the following example article. (click the Toggle inline sources link in the toolbar section of the sidebar to switch to inline-source mode. Also consider the wiki-markup for the examples.)

Note: This is meant as a demo - if we were actually to adopt something like this, the template names would be shorter. When displaying in inline mode there is extra line breaks in the sources section. I don't think that is a major issue

Some article
Some statement supported by source 1. Some statement supported by source 2. Another statement supported by source 1.. Yet another statement supported by the first source (note different template in source)

Some article (v2)
This is with all the sources at the end (per Blood Red Salmon's comment - although this is not quite what he meant i think).Note the first example somewhat interferes with this one. It would work as expected if on its own page. Some statement supported by source 1. Some statement supported by source 2. Another statement supported by source 1.

Some article (v3)
This is with all the sources at the end (per Blood Red Salmon's comment - I think this is more what he meant by his comment than v2 was). Some statement supported by source 1. Some statement supported by source 2. Another statement supported by the first source.