Talk:Nidec Copal Corporation
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
References section into External links section
editThe References section should be renamed External links. The reason is that External links are links which provide more information about a subject, such as a companies home page. Reference sections are lists of urls that are cited in various parts of the article. See Helicon Filter for an example. Links which support information in the article have reference marks (attached to that information) and the list of links is at the bottom. Other links which aren't necessarily cited as a reference from the article are in the External links section. The only link you currently have in the References section is the corporate link (and is not referenced in the article). This falls under the category of external links. Althepal 23:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Generally, when a source is used as a reference, it is placed in the references section. Since the company's home page was used as a reference when I was writing this, it should be there. Otherwise we're not stating accurately where we got this info, are we? Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 08:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, so I'll format it as a reference. This way there will be no confusion. There should be another section for external links (containing the corporate site), but I'll let you make it. Althepal 19:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you're misinformed; references do not need to be inline using the <ref> syntax. However, it doesn't hurt to do it - except inasmuch as it inaccurately leaves the impression that it's just a reference for that single piece. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 21:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Do as you please. If every detail from the article is from one source, you should put it at the end. Generally on Wikipedia, if you make a questionable statement, you can have a reference to back it up. I don't think that the section should be References at all, but if it is, I think it should have references from the article. Again, do what you think is best to improve the article. Cheers, Althepal 23:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)