"
Ok, I've looked at Hanged, drawn and quartered (ugh!), and  similarly pointed me to Marco Polo, and I think I'm getting it now - bear with me, my head's been this shape for a long time now! That is, I can see that one could feel a bit overwhelmed by some of the refs in Reculver, as there's so much in them. That's something that I'm used to and comfortable with, but I suppose the point is that it could be well outside many readers' comfort zones? So, I think I'm convinced. Which means that now, it's me that's intimidated - by the coding I'll have to learn, and the scale of the task! I think this is partly why I let it slide, when Chzz first suggested it. To be honest, I think I feel a little like MF these days - though I have put a lot of effort into some articles in the past, I've wanted to back away from the friction that often arises in WP; but sometimes I'll still get involved - popping up here asking for help with Reculver was spurred by an accidental urge to buff up Walkington Wold burials, which came over me only in the last couple of days - and so I'd like to use that to get obscure, remote, yet historically fascinating Reculver up to GA, in case I never feel the urge again.
In view of which, I think I'll tinker with the ""tentative experiment"" in the Reculver article in the next day or two, to straighten it out, and to explore what needs to be done. While I'm here, though, is there a citation template that renders a bibliography entry in a format like ""Bloggs, J., Going for GA, Oxbridge, 2011.""? Or ""Bloggs, J., ""How to do it"", in Joseph, B. (ed.), It's Like This, Oxbridge, 2011, pp. 1-100.""? I haven't seen one. Or would there be no need to use a citation template at all, even? Such is the level of my inexperience with these things... Cheers.   "