Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?
The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
field.
What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only
including <ref name="WHATEVER" /> and <references /> tags. As the
cursor
moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box
below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited.
Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage?
FT2
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo <stvrtg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple
En.wiki:
'''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of
biology.<ref>Williams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural
selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''.
Princeton. "Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive
importance in biology." p5</ref> It is the process whereby an organism
becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].<ref>The ''Oxford Dictionary
of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as "Any change in the
structure or
functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its
environment".</ref> Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to
a
characteristic which is especially important for an organism's
survival.<ref>Both uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by
King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of
genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed.</ref> For example, the adaptation of
horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast
and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable
population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully,
that is, by [[natural selection]].
The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline
<refs> make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing
persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of
separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe -
then at least carriage-returns - putting the <ref> on the next line -
would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but
the text can actually be readable in edit mode).
Anyway, working on something unsourced like:
In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed
''effect'' of the
process of [[evolution]] —wherein canonical [[organism]]s
(species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently
within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed
before the theory of evolution —Lamarck had made some
groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. "Adaptation" in
reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to
the canonical form of the species — changes brought about by a
process of [[natural selection]]. "Adaptation" in the context of
biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection.
-Stevertigo
Sources available upon request.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l