Their reference markup is incredibly overengineered, convoluted, and underdocumented, it is unbelivable!
Use the reference:
This is a fact.{{sfn|Schweber|1994|p=487}}Define the reference:
===Sources===
{{refbegin|2|indent=yes}}
*{{Cite book|author-link=Silvan S. Schweber |title=QED and the Men Who Made It: Dyson, Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga|last=Schweber|first=Silvan S.|location=Princeton|publisher=University Press|year=1994 |isbn=978-0-691-03327-3 |url=https://archive.org/details/qedmenwhomadeitd0000schw/page/492 |url-access=registration}}
{{refend}}sfn is magic and matches the the author last name and date from the Cite, it is documented at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:SfnUnforutunately, if there are multiple duplicate
Cites inline in the article, it will complain that there are multiple definitions, and you have to first factor out the article by replacing all those existing Cite with sfn, and keeping just one Cite at the bottom. What a pain...You can also link to a specific page of the book, e.g. if it is a book is on Internet Archive Open Library with:
{{sfn|Murray|1997|p=[https://archive.org/details/supermenstory00murr/page/86 86]}}For multiple pages should use
pp= instead of p=. Does not seem to make much difference on the rendered output besides showing p. vs pp., but so be it:
{{sfn|Murray|1997|pp=[https://archive.org/details/supermenstory00murr/page/86 86-87]}}Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.