Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:CNSV)
Jump to: navigation, search
  Main   Talk   Portal   Showcase   Assessment   Collaboration   Incubator   Guide   Newsroom   About Us   Commons  


Shortcuts:

WikiProject Conservatism is a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to conservatism. You can learn more about us here. If you would like to help, please join the project, inquire on the talk page and see the to-do list below. Guidelines and other useful information can be found here.


Tasks

Here are some tasks you can do:
vieweditdiscusshistorywatch

Conservatism articles

Conservatism article rating and assessment scheme
(NB: Listing, Log & Stats are updated on a daily basis by a bot)
Daily log of status changes
Current Statistics
Index · Statistics · Log · Update


See also


Reports


Dashboard

Alerts

Articles for deletion
Requests for comments
Requested moves

Assessment log

April 18, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

April 17, 2014

Reassessed

April 16, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

April 15, 2014

Removed

April 13, 2014

Reassessed

  • Nigel Evans (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class (rev · t).

April 11, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

April 10, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

April 9, 2014

Assessed

  • Jeff Kuhner (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 7, 2014

Reassessed

April 4, 2014

Reassessed

April 2, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

April 1, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

March 30, 2014

Assessed

March 29, 2014

Reassessed

Assessed

March 28, 2014

Reassessed

March 27, 2014

Renamed

March 25, 2014

Reassessed

March 23, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

  • REAL Women of Canada (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Yelena Mizulina (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

March 16, 2014

Renamed

Removed

March 14, 2014

Removed

March 13, 2014

Assessed

March 12, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

March 11, 2014

Renamed

March 10, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

March 8, 2014

Reassessed

  • James Cleverly (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

March 6, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

March 5, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

March 3, 2014

Reassessed

  • Ronald Kessler (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

March 2, 2014

Reassessed

  • Breitbart.com (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

February 23, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

Removed

  • Jim Conrad (talk) removed. Quality rating was Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance rating was Unknown-Class (rev · t).

February 22, 2014

Reassessed

February 21, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

February 20, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

February 17, 2014

Reassessed

Assessed

Removed

February 13, 2014

Reassessed

February 12, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

  • Shawn Skinner (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

February 11, 2014

Assessed

February 10, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

February 8, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

  • Nelson Wong (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).
  • Shawn Skinner (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Unassessed-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

February 7, 2014

Reassessed

  • Ken Mehlman (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

February 5, 2014

Reassessed

  • In God we trust (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).

February 4, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

February 3, 2014

Reassessed

February 2, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

February 1, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

January 31, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

January 23, 2014

Reassessed

  • Jesse Lee Peterson (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

January 22, 2014

Reassessed

  • Allen Tate (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Bay Buchanan (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Patrick Allitt (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).
  • Popular Movement (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

January 21, 2014

Reassessed

  • Tamworth Manifesto (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

January 19, 2014

Reassessed

Assessed

January 18, 2014

Reassessed

  • Generation Zero (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to Stub-Class (rev · t).
  • Loretta Young (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Tea Party Caucus (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

January 17, 2014

Assessed

January 16, 2014

Reassessed

January 14, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

  • Mel Martínez (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

January 13, 2014

Reassessed

January 11, 2014

Reassessed

January 10, 2014

Assessed

January 9, 2014

Reassessed

Assessed

January 8, 2014

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

Removed

January 7, 2014

Reassessed

January 5, 2014

Reassessed

Assessed

Removed

January 4, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

January 3, 2014

Assessed

January 1, 2014

Renamed

Assessed

December 31, 2013

Reassessed

  • Joseph Sobran (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

December 29, 2013

Assessed

December 27, 2013

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

  • Fusionism (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as High-Class (rev · t).

December 26, 2013

Reassessed

  • Howard Ahmanson, Jr. (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).
  • Protestant Coalition (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Ron Manners (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).

December 25, 2013

Removed

December 24, 2013

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

December 22, 2013

Reassessed

December 21, 2013

Reassessed

December 20, 2013

Reassessed

December 19, 2013

Reassessed

December 18, 2013

Renamed

Assessed

Requests for Comment


Talk:Gun politics in the United States

=== Brief, neutral statement of the issue

The issue here involves the section of this Wikipedia article titled "Security against tyranny". Would it be okay to say briefly in that section whether or not the check-against-tyranny argument for gun rights is unique to the United States? That could be done in the following way, or in some other way:

In modern times, the check-against-tyranny argument for gun rights has not been entirely confined to the United States, but that is not to say the argument has gotten much traction elsewhere.[1][2][3][4]
[1]Springwood, Charles. Open Fire, Understanding Global Gun Cultures, pp. 37-38 (Berg 2007).

[2]Chapman, Simon. Over Our Dead Bodies: Port Arthur and Australia's Fight for Gun Control, p. 221 (Sydney University Press, 2013).

[3]Brown, R. Arming and Disarming: A History of Gun Control in Canada, p. 218 (University of Toronto Press, 2012).

[4]Squires, Peter. Gun Culture or Gun Control?: Firearms and Violence: Safety and Society, p. 230 (Routledge, 2012).

Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:2013–14 Thai political crisis

These are sources current cited to support the phrase "hidden agenda: royal succession":
  • "The leaders of the 100,000-odd protesters who blocked some of Bangkok’s key intersections Sunday are said by knowledgeable political analysts to be deeply involved in not just a battle for political primacy but for control of the looming succession of the country’s monarchy." http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/thailand-land-snarls/

These articles, analysis and opinions, in more or less degree, imply the monarchy-related benefit, relationship and/or agenda of the ongoing protest in Thailand. Considering these sources, should the claim "hidden agenda: royal succession" be represented as fact?

Related guidelines, policies and essays discussed earlier are WP:THIRDPARTY, WP:YESPOV, WP:EXCEPTIONAL and WP:RELIABLE --Biglobster (talk) 05:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:UK Independence Party

Numerous reliable, academic sources describe UKIP as far-right. Please see some here:
  • "While some forces on the left have benefited from New Labour's abandonment of social democratic politics, there is evidence that Far Right parties such as the British National Party (BNP) and United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) have been boosted by Labour's abandonment of social democratic polices." (Dr Ashley Lavelle: The Death of Social Democracy: Political Consequences in the 21st Century, 2013, p104)
  • "Because of the party list proportional representation system, small parties have also had some success in EU parliamentary elections. Indeed, a new far-right, anti-EU and anti-immigrant party, the UK Independent Party (UKIP), cames in second to the Conseervatives in the voting for the EU Parliament in June 2009." (Arthur B. Gunlicks: Comparing Liberal Democracies: The United States, United Kingdom, France, 2011, p121)
  • "Meanwhile, Conservative voters gave strong support to the far-right with their second preference; 41 per cent chose the UK Independence Party, and 10 per cent chose the British National Party...." (Helen Margetts, in Josep M. Colomer (ed): Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems, 2013, p51)
  • Ruth Wodak; John E. Richardson (2013). Analysing Fascist Discourse: European Fascism in Talk and Text. Routledge. pp. 29–. ISBN 978-0-415-89919-2.

These are all relativley new sources, and they all describe the party as far-right. Should the party be labelled as right-wing to far-right in the Infobox? LordFixit (talk) 07:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Location map Israel

The following templates used to display location maps of the region of Israel (or its occupied territories) named in their title:

All of these maps, along with Template:Location map Israel (which formerly displayed File:Israel location map.svg), have been updated to instead display File:Neutral Israel location map.svg. The reason for these changes was that displaying the Israeli-occupied territories in the fashion that they did was a violation of WP:NPOV. However, these changes now make it impossible to distinguish the Israeli-occupied territories from the surrounding area, and they cause all location maps that formerly displayed a zoomed-in high-detail region to now display a much larger area, compacting the points together. Should these image changes be kept or reverted, or should another option be considered?

Display File:Neutral Israel location map.svg in all

Display original images in all

  1. Support as proposer. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Narendra Modi

does the following statement needs to be reworded in the lead section " his administration has also been criticized for failing to make a significant positive impact upon the human development of the state " to "Views about the human development under his administration remains mixed." as per D4iNa4Shrikanthv (talk) 10:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Russia

Should the following text be re-added to the lead?
Current: It is a federal semi-presidential republic.
Proposed re-addition: It is a federal semi-presidential republic, comprising eighty-five federal subjects (including the internationally disputed annexation of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol City).<ref>{{cite web | url=http://kremlin.ru/news/20605 | title=Treaty Between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Crimea on Ascension to the Russian Federation of the Republic of Crimea and on Establishment of New Subjects Within the Russian Federation | publisher=Kremlin.ru | date=18 March 2014 | accessdate=10 April 2014}}{{ru icon}}</ref>

Opening this RfC to attempt to resolve multi-editor dispute. See #Number_of_federal_subjects above for lengthy prior discussion. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 02:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Right Sector

Right Sector was formed as from a series of ultra-nationalist and paramilitary organizations at the end of 2013, and is now the largest far-right party in Ukraine. Right Sector is adamant that it is not a fascistic organization. Because it's ideology is contested, I want to note that some important western papers describe its politics as "far-right, ultra-nationalist or fascistic," as for Jobbik and Svoboda. Another editor however is adamant that sources do not describe it as fascistic. Do they? -Darouet (talk) 18:46, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Australian Senate special election in Western Australia, 2014

Should this page contain an Infobox, as is generally standard for elections? See:

LordFixit (talk) 20:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:List of Ukrainian elections

This article significantly and unnecessarily duplicates the corresponding articles on each election. It is far from being a list. I propose merging of each section into the corresponding article and reducing this article into a true list. — Petr Matas 18:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:False flag

Should this article briefly describe the various published points of view about what caused the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana? Binksternet (talk) 16:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Stoning

There is a need for a third opinion from neutral editors on the lede of this article.

An editor is removing sourced information from the lede; is removing a map on the legality of stoning; and is misrepresenting sources.

The originl lede included this:

Stoning remains a legal form of judicial punishment in Iran, Qatar, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Northern Nigeria, Terengganu in Malaysia, Aceh in Indonesia, United Arab Emirates, and Pakistan. Stonings after legal procedures have been reported only in Iran and Somalia; although several other countries practice extrajudicial stoning, while several others have sentenced people to death by stoning, but have not carried out the sentences.[1][2][3][4]

and this map:

Countries with stoning as a legal penalty
  In law but no longer in use
  In law and in use
  In law, not actively in use at a regional level


The user has removed much of the information, as well as the map. The user has added to the lede: "In modern times, false allegations of stoning become part of political propaganda, as in case of Iran[5][6]

and has refused a compromise that would read:"Iran has claimed that in modern times false allegations of stoning have become part of political propaganda."
Some help here would be appreciated.188.25.158.94 (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Russians in Estonia

Several users who monitor this page refuse to include claims of human rights abuse citing SOAP as a reason.

Also claim of Soviet annexation being illegal is WP:POV and WP:LABEL. Just like we can't add the labels "terrorist" to al-Qaeda or "racist" to Nazi Germany, we likewise shouldn't describe the Soviet annexation of Baltic states as "illegal".--Kathovo talk 12:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Police state

The entire "Rating systems" section of the article Police state has been repeatedly deleted. It includes the text, references, and two maps which appear to the far right in this version of the article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Police_state&oldid=601352523. Do you feel this section and these maps are relevant to the article, reliably sourced and neutral in point of view, or do you feel all this material should be deleted because it doesn't belong in the article? Ghostofnemo (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Sunflower Student Movement

Following recent political event in Taiwan and associated In The News candidacy", it have been STRONGLY asked by ITN's admin to check this article for its tone. Then, the event would be acceptable for ITN. Yug (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement

Following recent political event in Taiwan and associated In The News candidacy", it have been STRONGLY asked by ITN's admin to check this article for its tone. Then, the event would be acceptable for ITN. Yug (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Crimean referendum, 2014

In the Results section table, the Crimea total registered voters is calculated as Total votes cast (sourced) divided by Turnout (sourced). The result is almost identical to the number of registered voters from February (sourced), which is out of date however. The question is, whether such calculation is permissible under WP:CALC, and if yes, whether the result has to be rounded to reflect the fact, that the turnout is given with a 3 significant digits precision, to avoid false precision.

Next, the Sevastopol total votes cast and total registered voters are both sourced and the latter corresponds to the official February figure as well. However, a simple calculation confirms with a 99.7% confidence, that at least one of these numbers does not come from the original vote count sums, but it is rather calculated using the turnout percentage rounded to 89.5%. This proof is an original research and I wonder whether we can make any use of it.

Previous discussion can be found at Talk:Crimean referendum, 2014/Archive 2#Original research. — Petr Matas 18:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Water fluoridation controversy

Four additions for the 'Statements against water fluoridation' section need NPOV editors to review and comment. 79.180.147.42 (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:List of countries by average wage

Should the "List of countries by average wage" page include ILO statistics and official national statistics in addition to the OECD statistics? Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 21:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Request board

This is a human-edited list of requests for comment. Click here to add a new request.


For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. This list is updated every hour by Legobot.

Deletion discussions


Conservatism

Jim Zeigler

Jim Zeigler (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jim Zeigler" – books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

This article is one big self-promotion, almost entirely edited by a single author, and seems to be nothing more than a promotional page. The subject asserts no significance, and the content is largely non-significant. This has been CSD'd before and denied with the administrator stating "terrible article, but there is a claim of importance and it's not irredeemable. plus, there are sources. take it to AfD if you like". Since then, no worthy changes have been made to make the article better, only the same author adding more promotional material. Further, the author has taken the page and copy-pasted the content onto "zeiglerstory.com" (author's name still intact as logged in), as further proof that this is nothing more than self-promotion with no signifigance. More, the primary author Zeiglereldercare, has been blocked as promotional. (talk) 04:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - Some pretty clear WP:AUTOBIO, WP:NOTPROMOTION issues here. Lots of low quality sources covering this guy, but I'm struggling to come up with any mainstream coverage. NickCT (talk) 13:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. The article is problematic for all the reasons cited above. However, as a former elected member of the Alabama Public Service Commission, a statewide elected office of considerable significance, Zeigler passes WP:POLITICIAN #1; see also [1] and the hundreds of Google results from the search string <zeigler alabama site:google.com/newspapers> . Stubbing or WP:TNT might be remedies of choice here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • User:Arxiloxos is probably right about re "WP:POLITICIAN #1". Frankly, I'm not sure I really like it rule. It seems that it would potentially capture all sorts of folks who were in fact not notable. Ah well..... maybe WP:TNT is the answer. NickCT (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • This may be the best course of action. However, it is worth noting that the position held by this politician has no other biographies. BigDwiki (talk) 03:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - As submitter. BigDwiki (talk) 03:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Joseph Bast

Joseph Bast (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Joseph Bast" – books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

Not a notable figure according to wikipedia's standards. Tiakat333 (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 03:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Comment I hope you'll understand my suspicion about a nom by someone with 2 edits unrelated to the nom itself. Would you care to clarify what notability guidelines this article doesn't meet and why?
Oh yeah, and here are some more sources: [2] [3] [4] Jinkinson talk to me 03:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Comment Sorry I don't have a lot of experience editing Wikipedia? I have tried to a number of times and am just so bad at understanding basic coding, but please don't fault me for that... The sources of this article, however, are mostly from Mr. Bast himself. That is why I doubt this person's notability. They have done little besides publish a few books, and I know lots of people who have published books that are not on Wikipedia. I think combining the information here with the information on the Heartland Institute's page could be a solution, but I am genuinely unsure of how to do that. As I mentioned, I'm not good with this stuff, but I'm trying to get better. Tiakat333 (talk) 03:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak delete He does have some claim to notability as someone heading an organisation which has been in the news and as someone whose opinion has been sought multiple times by the media. But the articles cited by Jinkinson don't provide much in the way of information about him; they just cite him as an expert or a spokesman for Heartland, and are nowhere near meeting WP:GNG. The links on the article don't qualify as independent and reliable sources: most are by Bast, with some blog and user-generated content. I can't find reviews of his publications in mainstream publications. But a couple more references from reliable sources that actually say something about Bast might establish notability. A merge to Heartland Institute could be possible. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

New articles

This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.

Rules | Match log | Results page (for watching) | Last updated: 2014-04-18 19:25 (UTC)
















Other listings

Cleanup listing
Popular pages
Top edits watchlist
Hot Articles list (Top 20)

Related projects

WikiProject Conservatism is one of the Politics WikiProjects.

General Politics | Biography: Politics and government | Elections and Referendums | Law | Money and politics | Political parties | Voting Systems
Political culture Anarchism | Corporatism | Fascism | Oligarchy | Liberalism | Socialism
Social and political Conservatism | Capitalism | Libertarianism
Regional and national Australia | China | India | Japan | South Korea | New Zealand | Pakistan | United Kingdom | UK Parliament constituencies | US Congress | U.S. Supreme Court Cases

External links

  • This project on Commons Commons-logo.svg COM

Directory Directory of WikiProjects

 

Council WikiProject Council

 

Guide Guide to WikiProjects


Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist}} template (see the help page).