Francisco Antônio de Almeida Júnior - Wikipedia

An article I created and co-wrote: Francisco Antônio de Almeida Júnior

submitted by
edited

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Ant%C3%B4nio_de_Almeida_J%C3%BAnior

Including a neat interactive map of his travels

4
29

Log in to comment

Hot Top New Old

Cool to see someone from the Portuguese Wikipedia! The mobile app hates the ‘1874 expedition’ section for whatever reason, but without checking the wikitext, it works fine on the website, so whatever. Maybe I’ll have a look at the full article later and try to do a bit of cleanup e.g. on the citation errors.

 reply
3
OP

I appreciate it!

I assume the mobile view/app doesn’t play well with the various templates I used in the article…

 reply
3
edited

So I have to say reading it now that you really need to do better on citations in the future. The article’s current state is an absolute mess.

  • Book sources have no page numbers.
  • Seemingly half of the citations have obvious, red errors.
  • There’s usage of ‘FamilySearch’ for non-trivial factual claims despite the fact it’s user-generated content. Another is a link to Letterboxd, unreliable for the exact same reason.
  • In a very basic reading of the first couple paragraphs, I’ve seen at least one claim that outright isn’t matched with a citation.
  • Many links are dead with no archives.
    • Multiple of these still are marked “untitled”, so functionally all you have to go off of is the date.
  • There are no English translations of the source titles (which isn’t required but is nice when effectively every source is in Portuguese).
  • Reference names are weirdly shortened in a way you definitely don’t have to since they’re only visible in wikitext anyway (e.g. The London and China Telegraph, 1874 is shortened to “teleg"). This normally isn’t terrible, but in this case, you’re using Wiki Q, so to even have a bare minimum understanding of what’s being referenced, you have to go to the Wikidata entry.
    • Taking that as an example, the Wikidata entry you created is titled “The London and China Telegraph, 1874”, except The London and China Telegraph is a newspaper, and you’re specifically citing the “Monday, July 6, 1874” edition, i.e. you’ve used a title that applies to many other issues of the paper (you also call it an instance of a “book").

TL;DR: Unfortunately an absolutely inscrutable spaghetti of citations that’s going to take a ton of effort to untangle. You have, I think, ~11,000 edits on the Portuguese Wikipedia, so I know I’m not punching down by pointing out that this is an utterly unacceptable state for citations to be in. A Wikipedia article is functionally worthless without proper citations.

 reply
0
OP

Thanks, I’ll try to do a bit of cleanup when I get the chance

 reply
2
Insert image