This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 2018 April 10. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
Is there a way to customize the message from Information regarding... onwards? I've found a situation at Chris Kaman in which I would like some more flexibility. Thanks. Zagalejo ^^^ 02:26, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
This Deadspin piece on Jordan Cameron shows pretty clearly how a player can use the media for their own benefit, which we have to deal with in regards to premature announcements. [1] It's an interesting read that illustrates the problems we deal with here when a player is in a "reported transaction". – Muboshgu ( talk) 14:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
References
I think we should prioritize the "advisory to editors" aspect of this template rather than "advisory to readers." The template's wording should give clear instructions to editors rather than the passive wording it has now. I'm also thinking we add "CITE SOURCES" in bright red (possibly flashing) 500% Times New Roman. Lizard ( talk) 22:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The specific problem of "reported transactions" being added to articles prematurely by those who want to "break the news" is something we strive to prevent. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Handling sports transactions for transactions that were not completed as reported. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
I've started a discussion that mentions this template at the idea lab village pump. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
This template currently doesn't communicate to readers or editors why using anonymous sources/breaking news can be problematic, nor does it explain what to do when people navigate to the page and want to update it. Instead, it hides the reasoning behind links (effectively a MOS:EGG issue).
I'd propose the following updated wording:
The subject of this article is in the news regarding a reported transaction. Information regarding the transaction may be based on anonymous sources or breaking news, which may be unreliable or inaccurate
which Wikipedia treats with caution. Please explicitly cite reliable sources by name in the text or wait for an official announcement. If needed, discuss changes on the talk page.
The new wording changes two things that can be considered separately:
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 2018 April 10. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
Is there a way to customize the message from Information regarding... onwards? I've found a situation at Chris Kaman in which I would like some more flexibility. Thanks. Zagalejo ^^^ 02:26, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
This Deadspin piece on Jordan Cameron shows pretty clearly how a player can use the media for their own benefit, which we have to deal with in regards to premature announcements. [1] It's an interesting read that illustrates the problems we deal with here when a player is in a "reported transaction". – Muboshgu ( talk) 14:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
References
I think we should prioritize the "advisory to editors" aspect of this template rather than "advisory to readers." The template's wording should give clear instructions to editors rather than the passive wording it has now. I'm also thinking we add "CITE SOURCES" in bright red (possibly flashing) 500% Times New Roman. Lizard ( talk) 22:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The specific problem of "reported transactions" being added to articles prematurely by those who want to "break the news" is something we strive to prevent. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Handling sports transactions for transactions that were not completed as reported. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
I've started a discussion that mentions this template at the idea lab village pump. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
This template currently doesn't communicate to readers or editors why using anonymous sources/breaking news can be problematic, nor does it explain what to do when people navigate to the page and want to update it. Instead, it hides the reasoning behind links (effectively a MOS:EGG issue).
I'd propose the following updated wording:
The subject of this article is in the news regarding a reported transaction. Information regarding the transaction may be based on anonymous sources or breaking news, which may be unreliable or inaccurate
which Wikipedia treats with caution. Please explicitly cite reliable sources by name in the text or wait for an official announcement. If needed, discuss changes on the talk page.
The new wording changes two things that can be considered separately: