Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WP:DT redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Deletion today or Wikipedia:Dynamic tension.
See also: Wikipedia:Neutrality templates, Template:Dispute templates, and Wikipedia:BLP#Templates
Shortcuts:

Dispute templates are used to alert other editors that work is needed on a certain article, and auto-categorize pages so that patrolling editors can aid their talent to the problem. The primary purpose of this page is to display and discuss the use of these sometimes controversial aids to joint edit collaboration.

They should normally not be used without a clear description from the applying editor of the rationale, preferably presented in a numbered list form on the article's talk page, in a section which includes the name of the template that was applied. As these items are dealt with, it is suggested each line be struck through. Some guidance should be given by the posting editor as to what action will resolve the matter when using section and article (page) tagging templates.

It is preferable that in-line templates be applied to content that is being objected to on bias or fact grounds. Inline templates are preferred because they can be attached directly to disputed sentences. Section templates follow next in preference to tagging a whole article.

Many editors consider use of any banner template in an article a serious measure of last resort, and would prefer other measures be exhausted before such detractions from the project be used. If one must be used, please make a thorough note listing deficiencies or items being disputed in bulleted or numbered paragraph format under a clear notice section heading on the article's talk page.

Please remember to use these appropriately, and use the most specific messages you can find for the situation.

Contents

For placement at top of an article [edit]

What to type What it makes Where it goes
{{Contradict}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Exclamation mark with arrows pointing at each other
 This article or section appears to contradict itself. Please see the talk page for more information. (February 2013)
Self-contradicting article
top
{{Contradict-other|[[Article]]}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Accuracy dispute
 This article appears to contradict the article Article. Please see discussion on the linked talk page. Please do not remove this message until the contradictions are resolved.
One or both contradicting articles
top
{{Disputed}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Gnome-searchtool.svg
 This article's factual accuracy is disputed. Please help to ensure that disputed statements are reliably sourced. See the relevant discussion on the talk page. (February 2013)
Disputed articles
top
{{Dispute about|'''The topic of dispute'''}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The factual accuracy of part of this article is disputed. The dispute is about The topic of dispute. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page before making changes. (February 2013)
Disputed articles with list of topics
top
{{Disputed-category}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The inclusion of one or more of the categories on this page is disputed. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page. (February 2013)
Disputed articles
top
{{Disputed title}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The current title of this article is disputed. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page.
Disputed article title
top
{{Hoax}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Suspected hoax
 The truthfulness of this article has been questioned. It is believed that some or all of its content might constitute a hoax. Please add reliable sources for the claims in the article or section, or comment on the article's talk page. If the claims cannot be reliably sourced, consider placing the article at articles for deletion and/or removing the section in question. For blatant hoaxes, use {{db-hoax}} to identify it for speedy deletion instead.
Suspected hoaxes
top
{{Neologism}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article may document a neologism in such a manner as to promote it. Please add more reliable sources to establish its current use and the impact the term has had on its field. Otherwise consider renaming or deleting the article.
Possible neologisms
top
{{Notability|
guideline (e.g. "Biographies")}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted.
Find sources: "Disputes" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (February 2013)
Non-notable topic, listing the specific guideline at issue
top
{{Notability}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted.
Find sources: "Disputes" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (February 2013)
Non-notable topic or failing to meet the current notability guidelines (verbose)
top
{{POV}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (February 2013)
Disputed articles
top
{{POV-check}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Ambox scales.svg
 This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (February 2013)
Possibly biased articles
top
{{POV-title}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this article's title, subject matter, and/or the title's implications, is disputed.
This is a dispute over the neutrality of viewpoints or other implications of the title, or the subject matter within its scope, rather than the actual facts stated. Wikipedia articles may have only one unique title; the use of the current title does not imply an endorsement of that title. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page. (February 2013)
Disputed article sections
under title
{{Unbalanced}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. Please improve the article by adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the talk page.
Articles which contain Unbalanced citations.
{{Autobiography|date-flagged}}
Edit
Talk

Links
This date-flagged may be an autobiography, or has been extensively edited by the subject or an institution related to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page.
Articles which are autobiographies and may not be NPOV because of that, with the date at which they were flagged.

For placement at top of article or section [edit]

What to type What it makes Where it goes
{{Multiple issues}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
  • Use the section=y parameter if you use the template for a particular section.
  • To tag a specific issue, set any string of text to the parameter, such as issue=y
  • To specify the month tagged for the categories that sort articles by month, type issue=May 2013 or issue=April 2007
 Top of article or section with three or more issues
{{Unreferenced}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Question book-new.svg
 This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2013)
Lacks attributions from reliable sources. See template page for special usages.
{{Refimprove}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2013)
Possibly inaccurate articles
top
{{Cite check}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Text document with red question mark.svg
 This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (February 2013)
At the top of an article or section where the text misrepresents the sources cited.
{{Original research}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. (February 2013)
Possible original research.
{{Synthesis}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Ambox question.svg
 This article or section may contain previously unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (February 2013)
Possible unpublished synthesis. (The text in quotation marks is replaced with the title of the article.)
{{Science review}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Ambox question.svg
 This article or section reads like a scientific review article. It potentially contains biased syntheses of primary sources.
Please replace inadequate primary references with secondary sources such as scientific review articles. See the talk page for details.
Top of articles or sections
{{Advert}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. (February 2013)
Pages that promote commercial products or services
{{Magazine}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (February 2013)
Pages that read like a magazine article instead of the formal tones expected of an encyclopedia.
{{Fanpov}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view. Please clean it up to conform to a higher standard of quality, and to make it neutral in tone. (February 2013)
Pages that read like a fansite instead of the formal tones expected of an encyclopedia.
{{Story}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article reads more like a story than an encyclopedia entry. To meet Wikipedia's quality standards and conform to the neutral point of view policy, please help to introduce a more formal style and remove any personally invested tone. (February 2013)
Pages that read like a narrative and tell a story rather than providing encyclopedic information.
{{Content}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The relevance of particular information in (or previously in) this article or section is disputed.
The information may have been removed or included by an editor as a result. Please see discussion on the talk page considering whether its inclusion is warranted. (February 2013)
Above the site of dispute in article or section
{{weasel}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (February 2013)
Article or section that has weasel words
{{peacock}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article may contain wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. Please remove or replace such wording and instead of making proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance. (February 2013)
Article or section that has peacock terms
{{Missing information|Info}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This article is missing information about Info. This concern has been noted on the talk page where whether or not to include such information may be discussed. (February 2013)
Article or section where information not present may be worthy of inclusion
{{Self-published|Source}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This Source may contain improper references to self-published sources. Please help improve it by removing references to unreliable sources, where they are used inappropriately. (February 2013)
On an article where a self-published (online or in print) source is cited, and is therefore not legitimately citable as a secondary source, according to policy.
{{Incoherent}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Ambox question.svg
 This article or section lacks a single coherent topic. Please help improve this wikipedia page by rewording sentences or removing irrelevant information. Specific concerns may appear on the talk page.
Section where some sentences in a section or the text as a whole does not relay an understandable message
{{Recentism}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Recentism.svg
 This article or section may be slanted towards recent events. Please try to keep recent events in historical perspective. (February 2013)
Top of article, or top of section in dispute.
{{Undue|article}}
{{Undue|section}}
{{Emphasis|article}}
{{Emphasis|section}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 An editor has expressed a concern that this section lends undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, controversies or matters relative to the article subject as a whole. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message.
Sections or text where a matter such as a controversy or incident has been given more weight than is appropriate in the context of the article or biography as a whole.

For placement in or at top of a section only [edit]

What to type What it makes Where it goes
{{Disputed-section}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Gnome-searchtool.svg This section's factual accuracy is disputed. (February 2013)
Disputed article sections
under section header
{{POV-section}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (February 2013)
Disputed article sections
under section header
{{SectOR}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This section may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. (February 2013)
Section contains possible original research.
{{POV-intro}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this article's introduction is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (February 2013)
Disputed article intro
top
{{Expand section}}

Edit
Talk
Links
[icon] This section requires expansion. (September 2010)
Top of section to be expanded.

For inline article placement [edit]

See also: Wikipedia:Inline templates
What to type What it makes Where it goes
{{fact}}, {{cn}} or {{citation needed}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[citation needed]

 After factual claims that need a citation to back them up.
in-line
{{Verify source}} or {{Check}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[verification needed]

 After suspect citations or source references
in-line
{{Lopsided}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[unbalanced opinion]

 One-sided statements
in-line
{{Verify credibility}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[unreliable source?]

 After suspect citations or source references
in-line
{{Dubious}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[dubious – discuss]

 Disputed statements
in-line
{{failed verification}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[not in citation given]

 After factual claims that have been checked and not found in the indicated source. Explain in Talk.
in-line
{{or}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[original research?]

 After text passages based upon original research
in-line
{{syn}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[improper synthesis?]

 After text passages based upon improper synthesis
in-line
{{Nonspecific}} or {{Unverifiable}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[not specific enough to verify]

 After factual claims that could be relevant, but are not cited and are too general for a {{fact}}.
in-line
{{Who}}

Edit
Talk
Links

[who?]

 After passages mentioning general groups (such as "many scientists") that could be made more specific by naming (and citing sources for) specific individuals.
in-line
{{POV-statement}}
links talk edit		 [neutrality is disputed] after passages that appear to have a non-neutral point of view.


For placement on talk pages of articles [edit]

What to type What it makes Where it goes
{{Calm talk}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Peacedove.svg Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.
Talk pages which are likely to have incivil or hot-headed disputes.
{{pbneutral}}

Edit
Talk
Links
Unbalanced scales.svg Please be neutral when editing this highly sensitive article. It discusses a topic about which people have diverse opinions.
Talk page
top
{{Controversial}}

Edit
Talk
Links
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.
Talk page
top
{{Controversial-issues}}

Edit
Talk
Links
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.
Talk page
top

For placement on talk pages of users [edit]

Main page: Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace

See also [edit]
Main namespace
Other namespaces
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Template_messages/Disputes&oldid=550407729"