Wikipedia:Citation needed: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→When not to use this tag: this too |
Undid revision 869214879 by Soundofmusicals (talk) Should probably reword this. WP:DIARY is a different matter. |
||
Line 21:
*Do not use this tag because you [[template:clarify|don't understand a statement]], or feel that [[template:confusing|"non-expert" readers are likely to be confused]]. Use {{tl|Clarify}}, {{tl|Explain}}, {{tl|Confusing}}, {{tl|Examples}}, {{tl|Why}} or {{tl|Non sequitur}}, as appropriate, instead.
*If the content is nonsense or is unlikely to be true, [[WP:Be bold| be bold and delete it]]!
*Do not tag controversial, poorly sourced
*If you are sure the statement you want to tag is not factual, even if it does not come under either of the preceding headings, it may still be appropriate to simply remove the text (delete it!). Be sure to add a suitable edit summary such as "Very doubtful – please add a citation if you return the content". If the original statement was accurate after all, this gives someone the chance to put it back, hopefully with a proper citation this time.
*If a statement sounds plausible, and is consistent with other statements in the article, but you doubt that it is totally accurate, then consider making a reasonable effort to find a reference yourself. In the process, you may end up confirming that the statement needs to be edited or deleted to better reflect the best knowledge about the topic.
| |||