First of all, be blunt and honest. I can take criticism. I threw this together in like 20 minutes and I don't expect it to be solid, or even that well-thought-out.

Alright, you know how when you go to wikipedia they have linked citations in the text like ^[1] and references at the end? Something like that, but for things like admin rulings and old (productive) tag discussions.

My thought is that these would be completely optional, internal links only, and with the emphasis more on keeping track of things rather than being used as hard evidence.

A plausible example:

e621:pools

Pools are a way to cluster certain related images together, most often used with comics, dōjins, tumblr ask blogs, and other series works. The images in pools can be individually tagged with the pool name as long as it doesn't conflict with a tag already in use.^{[1]]To set up a pool...}

The citation here leads to a specific comment, gives the context, and allows the reader to gauge for themselves how accurate a particular sentence or section is.

Potential benefits:

• A way to keep track of previous admin rulings that anyone can access, either to verify content or to reference it.
• Having something like a "See also:" section which would include places where the tags have been discussed before might be useful to have on hand.
• Aid future discussions and save time spent hunting down these discussions.
• Aid in constructing the wiki, because things may be less likely to get edited out (admittedly, I don't know if this is even really an issue).

Potential concerns:

• Wiki and markup
• It may be messy, complicated, or otherwise need to be

hacked together.

• It supports superscript with the ^{tag and, though it looks good, it's not very user friendly to write.}
• We number them or something(^[1][2][3]), but they would need to be manually renumbered as you add links.
• An alternative might be to use something along the lines of ^[A] for admin rulings and ^[D] for additional discussion. It's not more user friendly to write, but it may be more friendly to edit/read.
• The wiki/markup isn't really designed for meta discussion (think something like citation needed, dubious source, etc... but, you know...actually relevant to e6). I don't know if we'd even need this, but it's worth mentioning.
• Removed
• The citations would need to be checked and updated every now and then for them to be useful, which would create at least some extra work (though I have no idea how much that would be).
• Admin considerations
• Admins might not appreciate their comments being harvested even more than they are now.
• It's extremely difficult to figure out whether a user was an admin when one of their comments was posted (particularly for newer and former admins), even when you know the date that they became an admin.
• Dates given are approximate (eg, 1 year ago) and that makes the chronology here even more difficult.

As for point 5 in Potential concerns, you can link to a direct comment inside a thread without it being the specific post alone in the form of

https://e621.net/forum/show/142710?page=1#post-142712 (this post)

Edit: It has changed from what I remember. Fixed

Xch3l said:
As for point 5 in Potential concerns, you can link to a direct comment inside a thread without it being the specific post alone in the form of

https://e621.net/forum/show/142710?page=1#post-142712 (this post)

Edit: It has changed from what I remember. Fixed

I was about to ask you if there was an easier way to get that particular link, but I only just now realized the "10 minutes ago" link gives you the post #, and I feel silly now.

Thanks.

parasprite said:
I was about to ask you if there was an easier way to get that particular link, but I only just now realized the "10 minutes ago" link gives you the post #, and I feel silly now.

Welcome! Oh, and don't feel bad, some still don't know that, but the other link is kinda more obscure sine there's fewer who know it.

And also, I once suggested something like that but it was just a section list on the right hand based on headingsused along a wiki page

I'd say just throw the links in a list at the bottom of the wiki, if you really want to add them, this isn't wikipedia where the citations are literally taken from documents all around the world and possibly a couple hundred years history.