Talk:Oregon State University Radiation Center

message: Each statement in this article needs to be carefully checked for factuality, as I found one fact cited using the Ohio State page, not Oregon State, and I'm not sure where the info about the district attorney and the triple murder came from in the section about the forensic technology because it wasn't in the article cited. The refs also need to be finished properly with citation templates at some point. Katr67 00:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for being diligent. Check out Wikipedia:Citing sources for help with citations. For an example of how to cite the same source multiple times see Marcola, Oregon, an article I started.  Basically you use the <ref> tags, but you name each ref and then you use a shortcut, for example  each time the source is cited after that. BTW, if you go through this article's history, you will see that the Ohio State site was used as a citation in the intro before I took it out. Happy editing! Katr67 01:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh man, I think I just reformatted that thing to a footnote and not a reference (I really should use a reference right?).  Thanks for your example because that is NOT how I was interpreting the Wikipedia:Citing sources link :-/ theanphibian 02:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um yeah, not quite right. Each article should be consistent, whatever style it uses. Also, I rewrote the sentence about the forensic stuff so that the existing citation backed up the facts stated in it, so your changing it to the other citation may or may not work now. Katr67 03:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just learned the value of the inuse tag!  I was going through making a lot of the same changes but then I saw you beat me to it.  But I merged our edits which means there are just more of the repeated references.  I think that two sources shouldn't be referenced just because they both contain the same piece of information (like what I did on the date of first criticality), but I'm not totally sure.  You could completely clutter an article up to no point with these, but maybe that's the point. theanphibian 03:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: The triple homicide came from the first reference: 
This involved neutron activation analysis and a significant amount of testifying on evidence related to a high profile triple homicide case.
 
I suspect that this is a verifiable source, as I've gotten a ton of other facts from that page and found other consistent sources, but in this case I couldn't find anything else on the internet that specifically mentioned a triple homicide case, so I thought the link I posted would give more information about the forensic uses in general (keep in mind I didn't know how to cite the footnote).  Considering that it was a 2000 publication, however, I don't expect that I will find anything else that mentions this specific case just by searching.
Wow!  The I-5 Bandit really was high profile.  That's kind of a cool fact. theanphibian 04:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: triple homicide

message: I really have been stalling on making more of these articles because I knew I had the style stuff wrong.  I'll probably be copying a lot of the changes you made to other articles and when I figure out how to use the link to the footnote in multiple places I'll see about putting it with every fact in the article like you said. theanphibian 01:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for being diligent. Check out Wikipedia:Citing sources for help with citations. For an example of how to cite the same source multiple times see Marcola, Oregon, an article I started.  Basically you use the <ref> tags, but you name each ref and then you use a shortcut, for example  each time the source is cited after that. BTW, if you go through this article's history, you will see that the Ohio State site was used as a citation in the intro before I took it out. Happy editing! Katr67 01:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh man, I think I just reformatted that thing to a footnote and not a reference (I really should use a reference right?).  Thanks for your example because that is NOT how I was interpreting the Wikipedia:Citing sources link :-/ theanphibian 02:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um yeah, not quite right. Each article should be consistent, whatever style it uses. Also, I rewrote the sentence about the forensic stuff so that the existing citation backed up the facts stated in it, so your changing it to the other citation may or may not work now. Katr67 03:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just learned the value of the inuse tag!  I was going through making a lot of the same changes but then I saw you beat me to it.  But I merged our edits which means there are just more of the repeated references.  I think that two sources shouldn't be referenced just because they both contain the same piece of information (like what I did on the date of first criticality), but I'm not totally sure.  You could completely clutter an article up to no point with these, but maybe that's the point. theanphibian 03:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Overall

message: I'm starting to move to the convention of putting brackets around dates of significance, like start-up dates, but not around dates of little to no significance, like when a number is applicable for. theanphibian 03:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates