This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Inline Templates page. |
|
Inline Templates | ||||
|
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Quite often I don't want to say or imply "I think this fact is wrong". I want to say "I don't know which source to believe", and I wish for an inline template like sources conflict . Maybe even conflicting ?
Just to pick a recent example, Russell Oberlin died in late November. Most sources say on the 26th. But the New York Times says "Friday" (which would be the 25th) and The Guardian also says the 25th. However, this is not causing a WP:Accuracy dispute, i.e. a dispute on Wikipedia, between different editors. They're just all hoping more reports will come in which will allow the issue to be settled one way or the other. It's not like either answer affects his career or notability.
If it's unlikely the conflict will ever be resolved, then the article need to be updated. Either reword it to omit the uncertain fact, discuss the discrepancy, or add a footnote discussing the discrepancy. But where it is likely to be settled, such as current events with conflicting early reports, a quick tag is nice, in order to:
Although this is a documented application for {{dubious}}
, is anyone else unhappy with that particular phrasing?
71.41.210.146 (
talk) 15:18, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
|discuss=
, |talk=
, etc.) all work in all of them. This would be semi-tedious, but as such things go this really isn't that large a category of templates. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 22:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Just a bit of maintenance. So far nothing seems to have come out of this discussion (i.e. no actual edits to templates), right? The templates themselves can be found at {{ contradict-inline}}, {{ ambiguous}}, {{ clarify}} and {{ inconsistent}} (i.e. use {{ tl}} to link to templates). CapnZapp ( talk) 13:28, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there a tag for "this fact in the lead section is then not discussed in the body of the article". Would be very useful and easy to understand. CapnZapp ( talk) 22:13, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
I have started a discussion on the template Year needed. Please join the discussion if you can.
Thank you, DesertPipeline ( talk) 06:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I would like to create some cleanup templates for mathematical equations to make it easier to point out when an equation is wrong or missing information. Would it be reasonable to make an inline template like Template:Clarification needed but that says instead undefined variables or something similar? I could do it but I am not an expert on template making (please ping me if you answer).-- ReyHahn ( talk) 11:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
I suggest to add a parameter "reason=XXX" to the template {{example needed}}, to allow an editor to specify what kind of example they have in mind. It should be displayed on mouse-over, similar to what {{clarify}} does. See e.g. Principle of permanence#Applications, where I gave such a parameter, which is -of course- currently only visible in the source code. - Jochen Burghardt ( talk) 09:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Inline Templates page. |
|
Inline Templates | ||||
|
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Quite often I don't want to say or imply "I think this fact is wrong". I want to say "I don't know which source to believe", and I wish for an inline template like sources conflict . Maybe even conflicting ?
Just to pick a recent example, Russell Oberlin died in late November. Most sources say on the 26th. But the New York Times says "Friday" (which would be the 25th) and The Guardian also says the 25th. However, this is not causing a WP:Accuracy dispute, i.e. a dispute on Wikipedia, between different editors. They're just all hoping more reports will come in which will allow the issue to be settled one way or the other. It's not like either answer affects his career or notability.
If it's unlikely the conflict will ever be resolved, then the article need to be updated. Either reword it to omit the uncertain fact, discuss the discrepancy, or add a footnote discussing the discrepancy. But where it is likely to be settled, such as current events with conflicting early reports, a quick tag is nice, in order to:
Although this is a documented application for {{dubious}}
, is anyone else unhappy with that particular phrasing?
71.41.210.146 (
talk) 15:18, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
|discuss=
, |talk=
, etc.) all work in all of them. This would be semi-tedious, but as such things go this really isn't that large a category of templates. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 22:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Just a bit of maintenance. So far nothing seems to have come out of this discussion (i.e. no actual edits to templates), right? The templates themselves can be found at {{ contradict-inline}}, {{ ambiguous}}, {{ clarify}} and {{ inconsistent}} (i.e. use {{ tl}} to link to templates). CapnZapp ( talk) 13:28, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there a tag for "this fact in the lead section is then not discussed in the body of the article". Would be very useful and easy to understand. CapnZapp ( talk) 22:13, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
I have started a discussion on the template Year needed. Please join the discussion if you can.
Thank you, DesertPipeline ( talk) 06:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I would like to create some cleanup templates for mathematical equations to make it easier to point out when an equation is wrong or missing information. Would it be reasonable to make an inline template like Template:Clarification needed but that says instead undefined variables or something similar? I could do it but I am not an expert on template making (please ping me if you answer).-- ReyHahn ( talk) 11:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
I suggest to add a parameter "reason=XXX" to the template {{example needed}}, to allow an editor to specify what kind of example they have in mind. It should be displayed on mouse-over, similar to what {{clarify}} does. See e.g. Principle of permanence#Applications, where I gave such a parameter, which is -of course- currently only visible in the source code. - Jochen Burghardt ( talk) 09:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)