I try to cite the record I was actually looking at and if there is another version cite that under a "See Also:" list at the end of the sources.
For example, Andrew has provided a citation to a transcript of the marriage record for Augustine and Mary at FamilySearch (source #2). But you seem to have a copy of the original record. An original record is far more reliable as a source than an index and, since you have it, I'm guessing that's the version you relied on. (Though I'm not sure, because the dates are different and the WikiTree profile is using the date from the index at FS.)
I would write a source citation to that original document, including what the record is, the date, the book name, page, number, who holds the original, etc. as well as information about and maybe a link to the repository where you viewed the record (looks like that might be FindMyPast). Then move the citation to the transcription at FamilySearch to "See Also." But if you relied on the index and just grabbed a copy of the record page, then the main citation is to the index and the original record would go under the "See Also."
To help other people evaluate the reliability or compare it to something they may have, Elizabeth Shown Mills advises noting the type of source in the citation, especially if it's something like an index or transcription. I just add the word "transcription" or "index" or sometimes note if there are readability problems.
As far as writing source citations, the broader genealogical community relies on Elizabeth Shown Mills Evidence Explained as a standard; that work is based on the Chicago Manual of Style, which is the standard for social sciences. The WikiTree Sourcer extension uses a different style that relies on blind (shortened) links and skips a lot of information that EE citations would include (or more accurately, the places that the extension gets the info from skip a lot of that info). I think the goals of the two styles are probably different.
If your goal is to establish reliability the EE style will do that better, but you will need to write your own citations. If your goal is to make it easy for someone to see something on another website with just a click, then the WikiTree style is easier to grab.
Here are a couple of examples for the marriage records.
WikiTree style citation to the FS page:
Marriage: "England Marriages, 1538–1973", database, (FamilySearch Record: NNWF-ZHH : accessed 19 October 2023), Augustine Wraith marriage to Mary Dilnot on 16 Oct 1688 in Bekesbourne, Kent, England, United Kingdom; citing Digital film/folder number: 004021500; FHL microfilm: 1736524; Record number: 79; Packet letter: A.
EE- or CMOS-style citation to the FS page:
Marriage of Augustine Wraith to Mary Dilnot, 16 Oct 1688, Bekesbourne, Kent, England, UK, index, "England Marriages, 1538–1973", FamilySearch DGS 004021500, microfilm 1736524, record 79, packet A, https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NNWF-ZHH , accessed 20 Oct 2023.
EE- or CMOS-style citation to the original record (I'm making up some info, because it's not available to me):
Marriage of Augustine Wraith to Mary Dilnot, 26 Oct 1688, Bekesbourne, Kent, England, UK, Book name [e.g., Bekesbourne Parish Marriage Register], volume # or name [e.g., 1673–1704 or volume A, etc.], page#, FindMyPast DGS ######, image ## of ####, https://findmypastblahblahExactLink , accessed 20 Oct 2023, citing Canterbury Cathedral Archives, Canterbury, England, UK.
"Citing" essentially means "I saw it at one place and that place said they got it from (or that place is citing) this other place." Usually, the other place holds the original records, but not always.
