Template talk:NeedsCitation
Hi, is there anyone there? This is so big that it really needs to be plural. Does that make sense? The wikipedia format is a nice little bit of text sortof like this: [needs citation]. But the format for fanlore's is a giant pink swath across the page. Since it seems to refer to the page as a whole, I really think the text should be "Needs Citations" (plural). Looks odd with the singular. Thanks! -- Msilverstar 21:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I would also love a version of Wikipedia's "needs citation" -- one that can go directly to the assertion that you think needs a cite.--Sherrold 21:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Now that we have the requested template -- Template:Citation needed -- should this template be retired? A large percentage of the wiki pages could probably use at least one more citation, so it's not like the banner at the top of the page tells us anything we don't know already....--æþel 23:01, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- I've never used the template. I think when a user/fan has an issue with whether a statement or addition needs a citation, sie puts it in the discussion page. At least that's what I've noticed these past 2 1/2 years. --Mrs. Potato Head 23:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Unlist/delete page?
So, we're supposed to use Template:Citation needed instead of this template. Only 12 pages currently use this template. Could change those 12 pages over to Template:Citation needed (or Template:Cleanup?) and then unlist this page in the "notices" category or delete this page? I think having it listed is needlessly confusing. - Hoopla (talk) 00:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- We could turn it into a redirect to Template:Citation needed?--aethel (talk) 01:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- See, I feel as though it's still useful to have a general "banner" for articles that could do with lots more citations, not just one that can only be used in specific places. Even if we only use it sparingly, I don't see an issue with having the option. However, I think some improvements can be made: as Hoopla pointed out on Template talk:Unreferenced, the similarity of the two templates' names is confusing. We could rename this one to "Template:Unreferenced" or perhaps "Template:LacksSources" or something general. Secondly, I don't think a line on this page straight-up telling people to use a different template instead is helpful, but perhaps we could add something more specific about how its usage differs from the other template, e.g.:
- "This template should only be applied to articles which have a great deal of unsourced or unverified information that impacts the quality of the page, or where the page would benefit from attention from someone with the ability to track down fandom-specific sources. Please use Template:Citation needed to flag up single instances where a specific citation is needed."
- That way we could use it to more usefully direct people's attention to pages that need attention from someone who kept all the receipts, or pages that seem really shaky due to a lack of verifiable sources. (I'm anticipating that those will be rare, since this isn't Wikipedia and a lot of fandom is anecdotal, but you never know). -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:38, 09 March 2019 (UTC)
- That all sounds good to me! No preference on the new name as long as it's different enough. I agree that there are definitely situations when a general banner would be more useful than just the small footnote, although I'm not sure that what those situations are will necessarily be clear to all users because despite being linked in this template, Fanlore:Citation doesn't really address why some things need citation and others don't... it just explains what citations are and why they're good, and then talks about how to cite things. I think that could be confusing for anyone looking for information about why one article with no citations has this template and another does not. - Hoopla (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- I know what you mean. If we agree upon it as a group, I don't see why we couldn't also update the language of the notice to make it clearer why it's being added to pages, if that will help turn it into a more useful tool instead of an outdated template that no-one uses. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 14:56, 09 March 2019 (UTC)
- That all sounds good to me! No preference on the new name as long as it's different enough. I agree that there are definitely situations when a general banner would be more useful than just the small footnote, although I'm not sure that what those situations are will necessarily be clear to all users because despite being linked in this template, Fanlore:Citation doesn't really address why some things need citation and others don't... it just explains what citations are and why they're good, and then talks about how to cite things. I think that could be confusing for anyone looking for information about why one article with no citations has this template and another does not. - Hoopla (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, I just accidentally put this on a page and didn't mean to, as I was intending to use [citation needed]. We need to figure out a way so that others are not confused between the two templates, or get rid of this one (which I would support). --MPH (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2019 (UTC)