Template:Primary source-inline/doc

How to use
This template is used in articles to identify sentences or short passages which have an inline citation but improperly reference a primary source. It produces a superscripted notation like the following:
 * Most people believe in ghosts.

You can also include a (non-displayed) reason note, to leave a better record for future editors. For example, the following usage might be appropriate to the arguable claim that "Most people believe in ghosts...":

Adding this template to an article places the article into one of a family of categories identifying "Articles with unsourced statements". To find all such articles, see Category:All articles with unsourced statements.

When to use
Use this template to "tag" information or analysis that you believe is improperly or unnecessarily supported by a primary source, so that other editors can see whether this use is appropriate and/or replace it with a citation to a stronger source. Primary sources may be used on Wikipedia, but they need to be handled with care.

"Primary source" does not mean that the author is too close to the subject. As a general rule, primary sources include all scientific journal articles about experiments, "eyewitness" newspaper stories, and historical documents. If you are looking for an independent, third-party source, use instead.

When not to use this template
Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately. Do not tag it: remove it. For more information, see the section on poorly sourced contentious material in the Biography of Living Persons policy.

Material which is doubtful and harmful may be removed immediately, rather than tagged. See Unsourced material.

If no citation is given, use the tag instead. If the source given is self-published, use. If you think the author has a conflict of interest or is otherwise too close to the subject, use third-party-inline.

If you have the time and ability to find an a better reference, please do so. Then correct the citation yourself, or correct the article text. After all, the ultimate goal is not to merely identify problems, but to fix them.

Many editors object to what they perceive as overuse of this tag, particularly in what is known as "drive-by" tagging, which is applying the tag without attempting to address the issues at all. Consider whether adding this tag in an article is the best approach before using it, and use it judiciously.

This template is intended for specific passages which need citation. For articles or sections which have significant material lacking sources (rather than just specific short passages), there are other, more appropriate templates, such as Unreferenced. If the article as a whole relies on primary sources (rather than the independent, secondary sources required by the content policies), consider adding the tag to the top of the article.

Redirects

 * psc
 * npsn

Inline templates

 * Citequote, for "actual quotations" which need citations to make them proper
 * Page number, request a page number for an existing citation
 * List fact, request a citation of a source which justifies inclusion of a given entry in a list
 * Clarifyme, request clarification of wording or interpretation
 * Reference necessary, wrapper for a portion of a paragraph to highlight it as needing citation
 * Verify credibility, flag a source as possibly being unreliable and/or unverifiable
 * Verify source, request that someone verify the cited source backs up the material in the passage
 * Failed verification, source was checked, and did not contain the cited material
 * Request quotation, request a direct quote from an inaccessible source, for verification purposes
 * Third-party-inline, to mark sentences needing an independent or third-party source

Content

 * Dubious – when a fact is sourced, but verifiability remains dubious
 * or – flag something as possibly containing original research
 * POV-statement – dispute the neutrality of a passage
 * weasel-inline – Avoid weasel words.
 * who – for placement after descriptions of a group of persons.
 * whom – placement after mention of a vague third party claim that is not sourced.

Article message box templates

 * Unreferenced, article/section has no sources/references/citations given at all
 * Refimprove, article/section has weak or incomplete sources/references/citations
 * Citecheck, article/section may have inappropriate or misinterpreted citations

Whole article

 * Unreferenced — whole article contains zero references
 * third-party — whole article contains zero indepdendent/third-party references