Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Sometimes multiple sources provide a fuller picture when taken together, such as when source A points out the reaction to a particular event in one country while source B covers the reaction to the same event in a second country. Sometimes it will be good encyclopaedic writing to combine the information from the two sources into a single sentence.
Two non-contemporaneous sources say that Kraft General Foods bought the rights to the American Capri Sun brand in 1991. However, two contemporaneous sources says that Kraft bought the entire company Capri Sun Inc., going into detail about how the company would be integrated into Kraft, and a later court opinion is consistent with this.
A commonly used shortcut to this page is WP:POINT. However, just because someone is making a point does not mean that they are disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate that point. As a rule, editors engaging in "POINTy" behavior are making edits with which they do not actually agree, for the deliberate purpose of drawing attention and provoking ...
It requires that several sources are collected together at one point in the text, breaking the link between which piece of text is supported by which source. This damages text–source integrity. If a piece of article text is re-arranged into another paragraph, sources have to be extracted from the bundling to move them to the new location.
If all of the citations are to highly reputable sources, another way to trim their number is to make sure that there is a good mix of types of sources. For example, if the six citations include two books, two journal articles, and two encyclopedia articles, the citations could be trimmed down to one citation from each type of source.
Here are two paragraphs showing more complex examples of editorial synthesis. They are based on an actual Wikipedia article about a dispute between two authors, here called Smith and Jones. This first paragraph is fine because each of the sentences is carefully sourced, using a source that refers to the same dispute:
When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with most "authority"—i.e. the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness. Eyewitnesses are, in general, to be preferred, especially in circumstances where the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically ...
The bundled citation uses one source for the size of the sun, and another for the size of the moon. Neither says that the sun is bigger than the moon, but the article is making that comparison. Given the two sources, the conclusion is obvious. So a typical reader can use the sources to check the accuracy of the comparison.