Template:Unreferenced is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.
This template is part of WikiProject Reliability, a collaborative effort to improve the reliability of Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ReliabilityWikipedia:WikiProject ReliabilityTemplate:WikiProject ReliabilityReliability articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. For guidelines on this template's usage, see its documentation.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
So the only solution is create an exact duplicate for the sole purpose of having it work with templates, which hold content in mainspace? Gonnym (talk) 07:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Making the "section" parameter change categorization?
While the proper template to use is {{unreferenced section}}, I've seen more than once {{unreferenced|section}} being used, and I've probably been guilty of it in the past myself. The issue is that it will still add the article in a subcategory of Category:Articles lacking sources, rather than of Category:Articles needing additional references. Would it be possible to change the template so that having "section" (or "paragraph", "subsection", or other values thereof) as the first parameter changes the category in which the article gets sorted? Even if the parameter is not recommended for use anymore, it could still be good to have articles using that legacy feature categorized correctly. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe should not be used for index-style articles?
Almost every meridian is tagged with this template, but most of them don't claim anything that really needs to be cited -- just "X meridian passes through Y country", which is not likely to be challenged and therefore does not need to be cited per WP:BLUESKY, I think (yes, national borders do change, but not quickly, and it's not controversial that, say, the 1st meridian east passes through Britain). I don't think it is helpful for {{unreferenced}} to be added to articles that (a) don't need any citations (b) for which it is unlikely meaningful content needing citations will be added and (c) which don't need reliable sources to not be deleted, i.e., articles that act as indices, as the prime meridian articles essentially do. I've already removed the template from some of the prime meridian articles, but I feel like it might get added back.
I think that the documentation should be updated to say the template should not be used on outlines and index articles that don't say anything that has been challenged or is likely to be challenged. Mrfoogles (talk) 23:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. I don't think the suggested code change would work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2023 (UTC)