The template {{failed verification}}
, which does produce the tag [
not in citation given, is certainly easier to use than {{fix}}
, but "citation", in the singular, is inappropriate when there are more than one. Why do you object to my putting forth a little extra effort to produce an accurate message?
Peter M. Brown (
talk) 19:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
It should not be used directly on articles by itself. Anomie ⚔ 23:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
{{failed verification}}
on one reference. I have now put it on the other. It looks pretty silly with both of them there. Of course, I won't leave things that way; in a month or less, I will either delete the badly sourced claim and its references or else alter the claim to agree with the sources. In the meantime, though, why can't I use {{fix}}
to flag the references as [
not in citations given? Why can't I, as a responsible editor, be the one to choose both the text and the category?
Peter M. Brown (
talk) 00:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
|cat=
where you should have used |cat-date=
, although you also created a tag with a rather unhelpful link and no useful tooltip, and you missed categorizing into
Category:All articles with unsourced statements. To really do it right, you should have used something along the lines of {{fix|link=Wikipedia:Verifiability|text=not in citations given|title=The material in the vicinity of this tag failed verification of its source citations|date=August 2012|cat=[[Category:All articles with unsourced statements]]|cat-date=Category:Articles with unsourced statements}}
. All to change one word from singular to plural. And the consider what happens if you copy this into many articles, and then the community wants to change the link from
Wikipedia:Verifiability to a page more specifically addressing the issues in the tag: for {{
failed verification}}, just the one template needs editing, while for your custom tag someone has to go through and edit all those articles.{{failed verification plural}}
or make {{failed verification}}
recognize a "plural" parameter to change the one word?
Anomie
⚔ 01:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
|
, you'd need to use {{
edit protected}} anyway since the template is fully-protected but the change would be to replace "citation
" with something like "{{#ifeq:{{yesno|{{{plural|no}}}}}|yes|citations|citation}}
". In this case, I'd suggest the latter route to avoid increasing the maintenance burden.
Anomie
⚔ 12:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)