:Article text.<sup class="reference">[[#|[1]]]</sup> More article text.<sup class="reference">[[#|[1]]]</sup> Even more article text.
Please note: The slash ("/") at the end of the second footnote tag is highly important. Usage of the Preview function is recommended.
===Avoid multiple footnotes. Put all sources into a single note.===
One of the problems that we run into with references is having multiple footnotes for one thing.
'''Here are the issues:'''
* It looks bad in the article, to have 7 or 8 footnotes in the text while you're trying to read it.
* It makes the article look like it has a lot of footnotes, when really it should only have fewer. All those separate footnotes for a single concept or idea could really be combined into one footnote.
* It makes the footnotes section look scattered and unrelated, if you were simply to go down to it and browse through it.
'''An example of the solution:'''
:The regular way to do multiple footnotes.<ref>1</ref><ref>2</ref><ref>3</ref><ref>4</ref><ref>5</ref> The better way to do multiple footnotes.<ref>
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5</ref> Even more article text.
'''What it looks like in the code:'''
<pre>
The regular way to do multiple footnotes.<ref>1</ref><ref>2</ref><ref>3</ref><ref>4</ref><ref>5</ref>
The better way to do multiple footnotes.<ref>
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5</ref> Even more article text.
</pre>
'''Limitations in this method:'''
* Only because of software limitations, this method cannot handle footnotes that have names. For example, <code><nowiki><ref name="name_here" /></nowiki></code>. The only option right now is to leave those kinds of references as separate footnotes (the regular way).
** But if you find a string of references that have no names set for them (usually because they are not used through the rest of the article), then you can combine them all as shown above.
== Uncited Material at Conservapedia==