This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
The final section Storm damage is basically a summary of the facts set out in detail in the article, combined with a hint to a possible assumption on Herodotus' intentions. Generally, summaries are not referenced. I do not see what Hairy Dude expected when placing the unreferenced tag. I intend to remove it if there is no good reason for the tag. --AHert (talk) 15:27, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Summary style. If there's to be a summary of the whole article, the place for it is the lead section. The "it's a summary" exception on citing sources in WP:WHYCITE only applies to the lead section. In any case, "a hint to a possible assumption on Herodotus' intentions" would constitute original research unless backed up by a reliable source. Hairy Dude (talk) 12:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be more formal in applying rules than the rule makers. Just using your brain is not research, and Wikipedia does not prohibit the use of one's brain. --AHert (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
