I ll have a think about this Some of it amounts to hmm not a basic civility but an outright encouragement I d like to take that up Sometimes however a citation formatting decline is due to fundamental errors I think a Comments with a lapse is better for the first type I m still sticking with Decline for the second type A third case is 2c errors concealing 1c errors Often real 1c checking can t begin without appropriate citations Perhaps this is a subset of the second kind of problem where citation formatting consistency causes a decline Jargon is harder Citations are a jargon driven field This is mostly where I ll be thinking about it In terms of actual line by line referencing the problem is that when I want to say Burdett2009Hateful for Burdett Example My hateful dreams about ducks In A Compendium of Duck Hatred Ed Janice Fowlloather London Avianloathe Press 2009 209 249 Often the nominator turns up with Janice Fowlloather 2009 A Compendium of Duck Hatred Avian or some other partial attempt made worse through use of the citation templates without understanding the basic concept behind citation for verification If I quote it as fn27 it breaks rapidly if I quote it as Fowlloather2009Compendium it should actually change In paying off verbosity against wordlimits I suppose I need to shift back towards verbosity but This is an Encyclopedia article you re quoting that makes it a tertiary source the only really reliable tertiary sources are ones aimed at an academic public written by academics The way we determine this is usually are do the articles contain a specific by line by an academic specialist in the field acting as an author of that specific article you quote Are the articles signed Your citation doesn t indicate this is an academic work by academics signed by academics it is an unsigned tertiary source Please provide a full citation so we can judge it Let me keep thinking