Template talk:Unreferenced/persist

Jimbo on Unreferenced
 Kim van der Linde wrote:
 * That would amount to deleting around 90% of the article as unsourced........

Jimbo Wales wrote:

Go for it!

--Jimbo

Oskar Sigvardsson wrote:
 * If you want to go the bad-ass evil & sneaky route, simply tag all of the unsourced items with (an edit which, granted, would take some time), let them be for a week and then summarily remove them. If it is as bad as you say (which I don't doubt, after a quick look at it), raze and rebuild from the ground up is a very sensible option.

Jimbo Wales wrote:

In general, I find the tagging to be overdone in Wikipedia. A better option is to nuke the unsourced material. Sometimes is warranted, I don't mean that it is always a bad idea. But it is overdone.

I very often see completely preposterous claims tagged with, usually because an editor is being excessively cautious. Be bold. :)

--Jimbo - Signpost interview: Jimbo Wales, September 10, 2007

WS: Mike Peel asks, "A lot of Wikipedia's articles are unreferenced. What do you think are the best ways to encourage contributors to reference their additions?"

JW: I think the amount of unreferenced content should decrease naturally over time. Certainly, BLP has helped in this regard quite a bit. At least in that sensitive area, we are much better than we used to be.

Delete this template

 * 1)  Summary of Unreferenced TfD
 * 2) last vote cast on this TfD at 07:38, 17 February 2005

Template placement

 * 1) Talk pages only Discussion beginning 2005 Apr 6 (based mostly on comments from TfD
 * 2) Straw poll on placement 2005 through 2006
 * 3) Test of new methods Unref-talk Special template to post on User talk page December 2005 See also Notification template 29 December 2006
 * 4) I Move this Issue be given an RFC 12 April 2006

Image and box formatting

 * 1) Box  Mar 27, 2005 (response to edit summary Diff 27 March 2005) and removal of box around template
 * 2) Box style 25 July 2005 Box is back around template to stay
 * 3) Image? 30 June 2006
 * 4) Proposed Edit 7 December 2006 Add and remove image Diff 9 December 2006 add image and Diff 12 December 2006  remove image
 * 5) Layout problem with Infoboxes 16 December 2006
 * 6) EDIT 17 January 2007 suggestion to add search link to template. See also Proposal for an update suggestion to add multiple search engine links to the template
 * 7) Articles v sections 22 April 2007
 * 8) icon needed 19 May 2007
 * 9) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 10) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3

Template usage no references and undereferenced

 * 1) I would like this template to say... "does not cite any" (brief) 16 Jun 2005
 * 2) Need template for substantially incomplete references 15 November 2005 (early discussion of issue)
 * 3) Usage revisited 25 November 2005
 * 4) Effect when used by New Page Patrol 15 December 2005
 * 5) This template should not be used with stubs 3 May 2006
 * 6) Template:Primarysources 5 May 2006
 * 7) Minor text changes 15 July 2006 Diff 15 July 2006 - Change to "needs additional" (sources) Reverted Diff 17 July 2006
 * 8) Sources vs external links - website-only documentation 30 November 2006
 * 9) This template should rarely be used, it is for lazy editors 6 January 2007
 * 10) Merge with Template:Primarysources? 10 January 2007
 * 11) Redirect from Template:Not verified 5 April 2007 links to discussion of merge on Template talk:Not verified
 * 12) Point of this template 3 May 2007
 * 13) Proposed change 7 May 2007 (UTC) (brief) on "any" versus "few" citations
 * 14) Changes to this template 10 May 2007 Broad but moderate length discussion on "Adequately and "few" vs "any" references.
 * 15) silly wording 14 May 2007 Another discussion about "Any"
 * 16) Merge and Redirect, after speedy close of TfD 23 May 2007 TfD attempt leads to discussion on articles vs sections and a Categorization.

"Adequately" in the text

 * 1) The first change to "does not adequately cite" was made on 21 March 2005    on 27 March 2005  is was changed back (for the first time)
 * 2) Partially unrefererenced 20 January 2007 leads to discussion about use of "Adequately"
 * 3) adequately Recommendation to wikilink "adequately" to Attribution (brief) 5 March 2007
 * 4) Sudden thought 25 March 2007 (brief) the wording of "does not adequately cite its references."
 * 5) Suggestion - earlier change revisited (long) Discussion beginning 20 April 2007 to revert from including "adequately"
 * 6) Diff Last removal of "adequately" from template at 13:52, 21 April 2007
 * 7) Adequately (brief) discussion beginning 24 April 2007 to return to "adequately"
 * 8) Changes to this template 10 May 2007 Broad but moderate length discussion on "Adequately and "few" vs "any" references.
 * 9) Project Proposal discussion beginning 15 May 2007 to clean up articles tagged with unreferenced when refimprove should be used.
 * 10) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 11) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 12) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 13) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3

"Material that has no source may be removed"

 * 1) Suggested addition of text 12 July 2006
 * 2) Redundant and misleading text 12 April 2007 Discussion about The statement "Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time."
 * 3) Newest change 2 June 2007 Discusion about Diff 2 June 2007 adding although it may be a good idea to ask for specific sources first and removal of the addition Diff 5 June 2007

Category/Categorization

 * 1) Category:All articles lacking sources 2 December 2006
 * 2) This template on Category pages? 17 May 2006
 * 3) Category:Articles lacking sources 13 May 2007

Date

 * 1) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 2) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3
 * 3) Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 3