Wikipedia:Further reading
This is an explanatory essay about Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. |
The Further reading section of an article contains a bulleted list of a reasonable number of works that a reader may consult for additional and more detailed coverage of the subject.
In articles based on scientific research, a chronological listing, with most recent items first, will allow the hasty or unsophisticated user to go directly to the most recent writing on a topic. In articles based on historical research older studies remain foundational and the alphabetical order is standard for historical bibliographies. An alphabetical list is often easier to assemble, and is more appropriate when writers on a topic are well known. With a chronological listing, if there is more than one edition of a text, the Wikipedia editor has to check dates of publication, reprinting, and revisions, to establish the correct order. These can often be checked easily on https://worldcat.org (WorldCat). If the Wikipedia author does not do this, readers are left to fend for themselves.
The section is one of the optional
It may include brief, neutral annotations. Some articles may also or instead have an
In articles with very many footnotes, it may not be obvious which references are suitable for further reading, and such entries may be selectively duplicated in Further reading.
Like the
Considerations for inclusion of entries
Topical
A large part, if not all, of the work should be directly about the subject of the article. Works that are not entirely about the subject of the article should have notes that identify the relevant part of the work (e.g., "Chapter 7").
Preference is normally given to works that cover the whole subject of the article rather than a specific aspect of the subject, and to works whose contents are entirely about the subject of the article, rather than only partly.
Reliable
Editors most frequently choose high-quality reliable sources. However, other sources may be appropriate, including: historically important publications; creative works or primary sources discussed extensively in the article; and seminal, but now outdated, scientific papers. When such sources are listed, the relevance of the work should be explained by a brief annotation.
A good starting point is
Balanced
Works named in this section should present a neutral view of the subject, or, if works of a particular point of view are presented, the section should present a balance of various points of view.
Balance is not merely a matter of listing
Further reading sections are not to be used for
Available access
The goal is to help readers who want to study the topic further. We can assume that readers have access to the internet and also to a local librarian. Cited items that are accessible--especially online or through a librarian--are preferred. Items that are very hard to obtain are much less useful. We can assume that all users can read English, but we cannot assume they can read foreign languages.
Limited
The Further reading section may be expanded until it is substantial enough to provide broad
When the list needs to be trimmed, preference in retention should normally be given to notable works over non-notable works. (Depending on the medium of the work, see a specific notability guideline.)
Relation to reference sections
Further reading should not duplicate entries that are in the
Further reading is not a list of
Some editors list sources that they hope to use in the future to build the article in Further reading. This is neither encouraged nor prohibited. Many editors instead prefer to list such sources on the article's talk page, sometimes by using {{Refideas}}. Still, directly building the article with the source as a reference is strongly encouraged, rather than merely listing the source in Further reading.
Conflicts of interest
Please do not add a work to the Further reading section if you are an author or publisher of the work. All editors are expected to comply with the
Presentation
Use the same citation style that you've chosen for the references in the rest of the article. To maximize the readers' ease of finding these works, please provide full bibliographic citations, including
Present the items in a
When an article lists a large number of sources or materials for Further reading, it may be helpful to add brief notes about the sources (e.g., beginner, advanced, detailed, survey, historically important, etc.), like this:
- J. Smith, Introduction to Linear Programming, Acme Press, 2010. An introductory text.
- D. Jones, Linear Programming Theory, Excelsior Press, 2008. A rigorous theoretical text for advanced readers.
Various formats may be used for these notes; they should be consistent within an article, but which format is used should depend on the nature and length of the annotations and the format of the reference.
See also
- Wikipedia:External links
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style
- Wikipedia:See also
- Template:Too much further reading