This is the template sandbox page for Template:Unreliable source? (diff). See also the companion subpage for test cases. |
This template is used on approximately 12,000 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.
Preview message: Transclusion count updated automatically (see documentation). |
This template is intended to be used when a statement is sourced but it is questionable whether the source used is reliable for supporting the statement. It produces a superscripted notation like the following:
Articles tagged with this template will be categorized into Category:All articles lacking reliable references.
Place this template inline, {{Unreliable source?|date=November 2024}}
following the questionable source. The template should be placed outside and immediately after the reference to the questionable source (<ref> ... </ref>
), within the article's text:
<ref>some alleged source for this</ref>{{Unreliable source?|date=November 2024}}
Next sentence.The template has the following optional parameters:
{{Unreliable source?|date=November 2024}}
{{Unreliable source?|reason=Your WP:RS-based reason here.|date=November 2024}}
|reason=
parameter, and only after a good faith attempt to verify the reliability of the source in question. Example: {{Unreliable source?|sure=y|reason=Your WP:RS-based reason here.|date=November 2024}}
NOTE: This parameter has an alias, |failed=
, which may make more grammatical sense when used with certain redirects like {{verify credibility}}
.This template should be used to express your doubt about the credibility of a source.
This tag should not be used on unreliably sourced contentious statements about living persons; if a source for such a statement is not reliable, the statement and the source should be removed immediately.
For whole articles or article sections that rely on suspect sources, considering using the banner template {{More citations needed}}
or {{More citations needed section}}
, respectively, rather than individually tagging a large number of statements.
For sources promoting fringe theories and pseudo-science, the more specific template {{Unreliable fringe source}}
can be used. Even more specifically, flag improperly sourced medical claims with {{Unreliable medical source}}
.
This tag should not be used to indicate that the sourced material could not be found within a given source. In that case, {{failed verification}}
is a better template. For statements that have failed verification and have a questionable would-be source, consider removal of the source (and possibly the statement) over using both tags.
TemplateData for Unreliable source?
Used when a statement is sourced but it is questionable whether the source used is reliable for supporting the statement.
Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Reason | reason | Note explaining why you think the source is unreliable as per WP:RS. Displays as a tool tip | String | optional |
Certain? | certain sure failed | If set to "y" or "yes" will remove the question mark from the template's output to denote a degree of certainty that the source is unreliable
| Boolean | optional |
Month and year | date | Month and year of tagging; e.g., 'January 2013', but not 'jan13'
| String | suggested |
Displayed tag text | name | Text displayed by the in-line tag between the square brackets
| String | optional |
{{Better source needed}}
, an alternative to {{Unreliable source?|certain=y}}
; especially useful for tagging sources that are low-quality but not necessarily wrong{{Dubious}}
, for questionable claims that seem unlikely to be properly sourceable{{Obsolete source}}
, for when a source has been surpassed by more recent works{{Primary source inline}}
, for misuse of primary source material{{Unreliable fringe source}}
, for fringe sources{{Unreliable medical source}}
, for fringe medical sources in particular