Wikipedia:Directly supports

The Verifiability policy and No original research require that it be possible to "directly support" all material in articles with a reliable source. For example: All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material. A source directly supports a given bit of material when the contents of the source match the contents of the Wikipedia article.

Examples
A source "directly supports" the material if the source says the same thing as the material. For example:


 * Wikipedia article says: Alice wrote a book.
 * Reliable source says: Alice wrote a book.

These match, so that source ✅ the material in the Wikipedia article.



However, when you see a situation like this:


 * Wikipedia article says: Alice wrote a book.
 * Reliable source says: Bunnies are fluffy and cute.

these don't match, so that source ❌ the material in the Wikipedia article.

Complete irrelevance of the citation's location
It does not matter how you format the citation. It does not matter whether you type the citation very close to the material in question or at the end of the page, or even if you type it on the talk page! No amount of formatting effort will ever result in a source that only talks about bunnies being cute being considered to "directly support" a statement about Alice writing a book.

Addressing problems

 * Source is about fluffy bunnies, but the Wikipedia article is about Alice's book: Use failed verification if an inline citation is present but does not directly support (i.e., contains the same information as) the contents of the article.
 * Source and article are both about Alice's book, but the citation is far away: If a cited source is present in the Wikipedia article, and it directly supports (i.e., contains the same information as) the contents of the Wikipedia article, but you think it's 'physically' too far away from the material, then copy the source to the better location.  This is a problem only of formatting the inline citation properly.  This is is not a problem of whether the poorly located source "directly supports" (i.e., contains the same information as) the Wikipedia article.
 * No source is cited: If no cited source is present, then the problem is that the Wikipedia article has no Inline citation.  Find and add a source, or tag it with citation needed, or blank it if necessary.  NB:  WP:BURDEN requires both an inline citation and for the source described in that inline citation to directly support the material in the Wikipedia article (e.g., to be about Alice's book, not about fluffy bunnies).  If you're missing an inline citation in the Wikipedia article, don't talk about a failure to "directly support".  A source can technically directly support the content even if it's not cited, because all that "directly supports" requires is that the content of the source match the content of the Wikipedia article.  Instead, talk about the need to have an inline citation for that particular bit of content.