[WikiEN-l] Handling unreferenced but likely-valid material

Wed Nov 29 16:10:32 UTC 2006

David Gerard wrote:
> On 29/11/06, Daniel P. B. Smith <wikipedia2006 at dpbsmith.com> wrote:
> 
>> d) So, the unreferenced material should be tagged. That calls the
>> reader's attention to the fact that the material is untraceable, and
>> its accuracy is hard to judge. Equally important, it also calls
>> everyone's attention to the fact that verifiability is policy, and
>> that it is taken seriously.
> 
> 
> {{unreferenced}} isn't a horribly ugly tag, and it does serve the
> reader without gutting the article.

God yes.  I remember when I worked on the Tintin article, I had a whole 
paragraph which was all sourced from the one source, so I cited that 
source at the end of the paragraph, and someone came along and stuck a 
cite template halfway in the middle of the paragraph.  I think the best 
thing is to use the unreferenced tag and copy the sentences that one is 
questioning to the talk page, where someone can dig a source out and 
work out the best way to cite it.  I'm finding I'm writing some awful 
articles in the sense of referencing tags at the minute.  I rescued 
Kieth Chapman from csd recently, and find I reference the same source 6 
times in the one article.  It just feels like overkill, but I can't 
really work out how to best cite.

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.19/556 - Release Date: 28/11/06