Template:Better source/doc

This template is used in articles to identify sentences or short passages which have an inline citation but improperly reference a primary source. It produces a superscripted notation like the following:
 * Most people believe in ghosts.

Use this template to "tag" dubious information or analysis which cites references produced by someone close to the subject of the article, so that other editors can know to back up the statement with citations, per WikiQueer:Verifiability.

You can also a (non-displayed) reason note, to leave a better record for future editors. For example, the following usage might be appropriate to the arguable claim that "Most people believe in ghosts...":

Adding this template to an article places the article into one of a family of categories identifying "Articles with unsourced statements". To find all such articles, see Category:All articles with unsourced statements.

When adding this tag to an article, also consider adding the tag to the top of the article to give a general warning to other editors that attention is needed.

Redirects
psc

When not to use this template
Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately. Do not tag it— remove it. For more information, see the section on poorly sourced contentious material in the Biography of Living Persons policy.

Material which is doubtful and harmful may be removed immediately, rather than tagged. See Unsourced material.

If no reference is given, use the tag instead.

If you have the time and ability to find an 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.

Many editors object to what they perceive as overuse of this tag, particularly in what is known as "drive-by" tagging, which is applying the tag without attempting to address the issues at all. Consider whether adding this tag in an article is the best approach before using it, and use it judiciously.

This template is intended for specific passages which need citation. For articles or sections which have significant material lacking sources (rather than just specific short passages), there are other, more appropriate templates, such as Unreferenced.

Inline templates

 * Citequote, for "actual quotations" which need citations to make them proper
 * Page number, request a page number for an existing citation
 * List fact, request a citation of a source which justifies inclusion of a given entry in a list
 * Clarifyme, request clarification of wording or interpretation
 * Reference necessary, wrapper for a portion of a paragraph to highlight it as needing citation
 * Verify credibility, flag a source as possibly being unreliable and/or unverifiable
 * Verify source, request that someone verify the cited source backs up the material in the passage
 * Failed verification, source was checked, and did not contain the cited material
 * Request quotation, request a direct quote from an inaccessible source, for verification purposes
 * Third-party-inline, to mark sentences needing an independent or third-party source

Content

 * Dubious – flag something as suspected of being incorrect
 * or – flag something as possibly containing original research
 * POV-statement – dispute the neutrality of a passage
 * weasel-inline – Avoid weasel words.
 * who – for placement after descriptions of a group of persons.
 * whom – placement after mention of a vague third party claim that is not sourced.

Whole article

 * Unreferenced — whole article contains zero references
 * third-party — whole article contains zero indepdendent/third-party references

Article message box templates

 * Unreferenced, article/section has no sources/references/citations given at all
 * Refimprove, article/section has weak or incomplete sources/references/citations
 * Citecheck, article/section may have inappropriate or misinterpreted citations