This is really something that could be done in the ref templates on the wikipedia side of things, if such a system is desirable.

I like the idea, but fear that implementation would mean bad things.

kael.shipman wrote:

I'm not sure if this is the place to discuss the philosophy of these things, so please feel free to point me in the right direction for this discussion if necessary. I'm curious as to what negatives you see in the implementation of the suggested system. One that I see is that some of the reference numbers for sources already have colors. However, if work in a different direction, maybe we could still develop a more ideal way of achieving source quality regulation. I just feel that it's the next logical step in the wikipedia idea. Not only would it improve the information on the site, but it might even get people thinking about and criticizing their other sources of information.

I think any way of rating the authority would lead, at least initially, to sources trying to game their authority ratings. This sort of gaming is what I meant by "bad things".

Certainly shouldn't be in core, moving to extensions.

kael.shipman wrote:

That's a valid concern, but I guess I used the word "quality" a little liberally. I was thinking in the vein of "proximity" to the origin of the idea, so I don't think that "score wars" between sources would really be all that possible. It would be as easy as saying, "check here if this source is a direct quote from the author of the idea; check here if this source is an interpretation of an idea; check here otherwise...." Of course, I'm not necessarily proposing the system here - simply clarifying my suggestion.

This is very likely a WONTFIX if nobody volunteers to implement this.