Template:Better source needed/sandbox
 | This is the template sandbox page for Template:Better source needed (diff). |
 | This template is used on approximately 21,000 pages and changes may be widely noticed. Test changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in your own user subpage. Consider discussing changes on the talk page before implementing them. |
Usage[edit]
This template is used in articles to indicate inline citations that link to insufficiently reliable sources. Placed after the source in question, it produces a superscripted notation like this:
To do this, place the template outside the ref tags, like this:<ref>[...body of reference...]</ref>{{Better source needed}}
You can also include a |reason= note, which displays as a tool tip upon mouse hover, to describe the issue to interested readers and to leave a record for future editors. For example, the following usage might be appropriate to the arguable claim that "Most people believe in ghosts...":
{{Better source needed|reason=Citation is the Ghostbusters' company website, which may not be entirely objective.|date=May 2024}}
General template for copy-pasting:
{{Better source needed|date=May 2024}}
Adding this template to an article places the article into Category:All articles lacking reliable references or one of its dated subcategories, all part of a collection of categories identifying articles with reliable-sourcing issues. To find all such articles, see Category:Wikipedia articles with sourcing issues.
When not to use[edit]
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately. Do not tag it: remove it. For more information, see the section on contentious material in the Biography of Living Persons policy.
Material which is doubtful and harmful may be removed immediately, rather than tagged. See Wikipedia:Citing sources § Unsourced material.
If no citation is given, use the {{Citation needed}} tag instead. If the source given is self-published, use {{Self-published inline}}. If you think the author has a conflict of interest or is otherwise too close to the subject, use {{Third-party inline}}. If the source has been surpassed by newer, reliable publications that no longer support the claim in the article, use {{Obsolete source}}.
If you have the time and ability to find a better reference, please do so. Then correct the citation yourself, or correct the article text. After all, the ultimate goal is not to merely identify problems, but to fix them.
Template data[edit]
TemplateData for Better source needed
This template is used in articles to identify sentences or short passages with information or analysis that has one or more inline citations but which are to insufficiently reliable sources. It produces the super-scripted text "better source needed".
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reason | reason | A reason as to why, or for what content, a better citation is needed.
| String | suggested |
| Month and year | date | Provides the month and year of when the template was placed.
| String | required |
Redirects[edit]
{{BSN}}{{Better source}}
See also[edit]
- {{Unreliable source?}}, inline template to flag a citation to work the reliability of which is questioned but uncertain
- {{Cite check}}, article/section may have inappropriate or misinterpreted citations
- {{Additional citation needed}}, the present source is insufficient but should be retained
- {{More citations needed}}, article/section has weak or incomplete sources/references/citations
- {{Nonspecific}}, a reference is too imprecise or ambiguous to enable it to be verified
- {{Unreferenced}}, article/section has no sources/references/citations given at all
- Wikipedia:Citing sources, especially § Unsourced material
- Wikipedia:Reliable sources
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup § Verifiability and sources
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability
