Anthony DiPierro wrote:
I find the unreferenced tag to be useless. Either
it says that the
article contains some unreferenced facts, in which case we'd be better
off tagging those few articles which don't contain unreferenced facts
with the opposite tag,
Then it shouldn't be used to tag the article. That's not what it's
for.
or it says that the article contains zero
references, which is already evident to anyone scanning the article
anyway.
The tag puts the article in the category. It also looks like a big ugly
box telling the editor "PLEASE DO BETTER KTHX."
If you want to put the tag on the talk page or use
a category, in the
case of articles with absolutely no references, I wouldn't object.
But I don't think that is a solution for what I'm saying, which is
that we shouldn't be creating such articles in the first place.
I suggest that we can only lead by example and peer pressure, and the
template does IMO help there.
The crux of the problem is in what the endgame should be for an
unreferenced article. Is it deletion or improvement? I would easily
support improvement. If an article is unreferenced that does not imply
that it is wrong; we just don't know if it's right.
Actions based on a deletion endgame consistently attract bitter disputes
and needless stress. In planning new strategies this should be
considered from the beginning. in the hope of avoiding the stress.
Without that this will be no different from AfD.
Ec