Ill have a think about this  Some of it amounts to hmm not a basic civility but an outright encouragement  Id 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  Im still sticking with Decline for the second type A third case is c errors concealing c errors  Often real c checking cant 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 Ill be thinking about it In terms of actual linebyline referencing the problem is that when I want to say BurdettHateful for Burdett Example My hateful dreams about ducks In A Compendium of Duck Hatred Ed Janice Fowlloather London Avianloathe Press   Often the nominator turns up with Janice Fowlloather  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 fn it breaks rapidly if I quote it as FowlloatherCompendium 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 youre 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 byline by an academic specialist in the field acting as an author of that specific article you quote  Are the articles signed  Your citation doesnt 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