Template talk:Primary sources

Template-protected edit request on 4 October 2022
"This article relies too much on references to primary sources" is a wordy sentence—"This article relies excessively on references to primary sources" flows much better and falls in line with other similar templates. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ per WP:BOLD &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Failing test section + BLP=yes
, can you look at test which appears to be failing? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That is why I added the tests. The code does not cope with both BLP and Section together — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 10:47, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The test now fails "correctly"!? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 11:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

OK now to sync the sandbox back to live? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 10:43, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Took me a moment to remember why I did this, but it still seems valid. It is to cope with both section and at the same time. The tests seem clean. Thanks  for the catch — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 11:02, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 20:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 22 November 2022
I think the wording of the template should convey the significant misuse of primary sources, as opposed to excessive. Excessive seems to imply overwhelming usage, which is not always the case even when a template might be appropriate (particularly when used for sections small enough to have used a small number of sources, and where primary sources might only be misused one or a couple of times). Perhaps it should be changed to something along the lines of "This article inappropriately relies on references to primary sources," or simply "This article relies on references to primary sources." TheGEICOgecko (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 5 December 2022
Please add "Article" between "this" and "by" Lina211 Follow your dreams  03:07, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Should be clear enough from the context of the message; this ought to be a "less is more" situation IMO. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ For some reason, the template did not match the documentation. Having "this" without a word following it was grammatically awkward. I added "article" as the default, per the documentation.  – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:53, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 April 2023
Change "secondary or tertiary sources." to "secondary or tertiary sources to this section." if parameter 1 is section. Timothytyy (talk) 13:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: if this were edited, then the sentence would read: "Please improve this section by adding secondary or tertiary sources to this section," which would use the word "section" twice and sound strange.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'er there 16:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)