Constant Content

Nowhere do I find any direction on the acceptability of in-text referencing in articles. Assuming it is acceptable, can I use superscript numeration or will the software reject or mutilate it?

I don't like the option of more thorough in-text referencing as I feel it disrupts the flow too much. A simple super-script number to refer to endnotes is so much cleaner. Can I do this or not? I see no direction anywhere here on footnotes, endnotes, or in-text references. Am I just missing it somewhere?

From the CC Extended Guidelines:

"Referencing Sources

We do not accept content with links or website addresses. However, if you want to reference websites, you may do so by dropping the http://www. prefix from the address and removing hyperlinks.

You may use your preferred style for referencing print sources."

Because it's an article and not an academic paper, I prefer to do references like the following:
"According to the New York Times, hamburgers are delicious with ketchup."
"CNN.com reports that most Americans prefer mustard on hot dogs."


**Note: I disagree with CC's policy of removing the "www." from website addresses because "http://example.com" and "http://www.example.com" do not always go to the same website, as they are technically two different addresses. I believe it's mostly to prevent word processors from automatically inserting hyperlinks, but it leads to incorrect citations.

SJH, thanks for the reply. But the most important point raised in my question concerned the use of superscript numeration. It's too late now. I'm going ahead with it and if it doesn't fly, so be it. You are absolutely right about the dictum on URLs. It is a really weak point about this site that references must be corrupted to the point they are useless. I think what I will do is offer to forward on the side a "real" list of references to whomever buys my content, so they can post something realistic and effective instead of the comic version acceptable to this site.