Help talk:Footnotes and endnotes

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

I have gone into some detail on this, since in the 18 months or so I have edited on WP, I have never used footnotes, and it is only since working on WS I have needed to know. I am sure other editors are the same. Apwoolrich 14:47, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

What do we do when the original text to be added has footnotes & you need to add a clarifying footnote of your own - how is the original distinguished from the editors footnote? AllanHainey 14:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
How about orginals 1,2,3 etc, WS notes A, B, C, then doubling up as necessary AA, BB, CC, etc? Apwoolrich 17:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Original footnotes should probably be included in-text (e.g. bottom of paragraph) using original notation. We ought to provide for annotation (our own footnotes) using templates like ref & note on wikipedia. These provide html links to footnotes, usually placed at the bottom of the page (as well as reverse links from the footnotes). These templates should be tagged to allow for hiding of the annotations, using EnDumEn's javascript trick. I've thinking a bit about how to do this. However, to allow for any annotation marks other than sequential numbers would take a bit of javascript programming, since unfortunately most browsers don't fully support css2. I think I would prefer a numbering system prefaced by a "W" to indicate that it is ours, looking like thisW1, or thisW23. Wolfman 19:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts… 1. Putting footnotes in-text wouldn't work very well because they vary in size and can encompass multiple paragraphs. For an example see History of Utah, 1540-1886 - Chapter 3#Footnotes. 2. Because the number of original footnotes from the source will remain constant, you could just number continuously after the last footnote, so that if you had 5 footnotes in the source, your new annotations would be numbered 6 and up. But using something like letters to differentiate them isn't a bad idea. The ref and note templates are handy, but shouldn't be required. I never use them. 3. When adding the annotations to the end of the document, it would be a good idea to use a header to separate them from the other footnotes along with a little blurb indicating they weren't a part of the original document (such as "These are notes and corrections to the original source document:", as here). —Mike 02:54, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Footnotes to Endnotes[edit]

Personally, most of the time I make footnotes into chapter endnotes, under a horizontal bar. These notes are linked using the wiki ref feature. This has worked out well for all of the works I have done this with. For works where this is cumbersome, perhaps creating a separate page where all of the footnotes go would be good. Then, just link to them in the main text, and use html style [url]#Anchor for get at them. It would probably be best to open all such links in their own window. —Wikijeff

Out of date?[edit]

Isn't this page horribly out of date? Surely, nearly all footnotes should be done with <ref> now? I think this page needs a total rewrite. I am happy to do it if others agree. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 18:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's hopelessly out of date and needs a complete rewrite. I came here for help with a footnote inside a footnote.

A few initial notes towards the rewrite:

  • Simple notes on using <ref> for footnotes
  • How to do footnotes that go over more than one page
  • What to do with footnotes within footnotes
    • How to manage a footnote within a footnote that goes over more than one page
  • When to use endnotes and when to use footnotes
  • How to do endnotes for a chapter and for a work
Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
I added Footnotes across page breaks to Help:Page breaks about two months ago. — Iain Bell (talk) 09:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Some thoughts on footnotes within footnotes[edit]

as well as endnotes found here. Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)