Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-84037-20161228193955/@comment-13471981-20170104093507
Hm I'm not sure if my question is still being understood.
I'm not saying whether References should be removed or should remain, or the status of Appearances and Sources.
I'm specifically addressing the previous scenario where if and only if an article only has one source, that source is listed in References the same way we would now list an Appearance/Source. However, if there were more than one source, the References would function as it actually should: as a list of citations.
Because of this previous policy, when we had an article with a single source, our stance was to not have a list of citations, but rather have that singular source simply listed under References (as we now would do with Appearances/Sources).
My question is, given that we now have Appearances/Sources, in the specific scenario where an article only has one source, should the References not have a list of citations instead of just listing that one source under References? Because if we did the latter, it would look redundant to readers because under Appearances, it would list Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles then under References, it would also list Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles. I'm proposing instead that while the Appearances list that single source, the References rather than just listing that single source as well, should be a list of citations as is the case with References section in any article with more than one source.
I would not be opposed, though I will have to notify both DarkFeather and Sima so they can decide on this idea as well. It makes sense to me, although I'm a little wary of all the Reference fixing we'll have to do.