Template:Facts/doc: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Created page with "'''{{tlx|{{PAGENAME}}}}''' differs from {{tlx|fact}} in that it assumes the statement requiring citation is true, but that it needs more references than are already provided. ...")
 
m (Protected "Template:Facts/doc": Robot: Protecting all pages from category templates (‎[edit=sysop] (indefinite) ‎[move=sysop] (indefinite)))
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''{{tlx|{{PAGENAME}}}}''' differs from {{tlx|fact}} in that it assumes the statement requiring citation is true, but that it needs more references than are already provided.  This generally happens because the phraseology of the sentence involved implies that there ''should be'' more than one reference given.   
'''{{tlx|{{PAGENAME}}}}''' differs from {{tlx|fact}} in that it assumes the statement requiring citation is partially true, but that it needs more references than are already provided.  This generally happens because the sentence construction implies that there ''should be'' more than one reference given.   


For instance, let's say you're reading an article and you come across this statement:
For instance, let's say you're reading an article and you come across this statement:
* '''On many occasions, [[the Doctor]] has rescued the [[Earth]] from alien invasion.''' ([[TV]]: ''[[The Christmas Invasion]]'')  Because this statement says that something happened "on many occasions", but only one instance was cited, an opportunity arises to flag the statement with {{template:facts}}.
:* '''On many occasions, [[the Doctor]] has rescued the [[Earth]] from alien invasion.''' ([[TV]]: ''[[The Christmas Invasion]]'')   
 
::''Because this statement says that something happened "on many occasions", but only one instance was cited, you need to use {{tlx|facts}}, thus:
:* '''On many occasions, [[the Doctor]] has rescued the [[Earth]] from alien invasion.''' ([[TV]]: ''[[The Christmas Invasion]]''{{facts}})


As with all [[:category:Maintenance templates|maintenance templates]], though, the preferred course of action is that you attempt to provide more references yourself, rather than flagging the article and leaving it for someone else to clean up.  Clearly, in the case of the above statement, it would be rather easy for even the most casual fan of ''Doctor Who'' to come up with a bit more than ''The Christmas Invasion'' as an instance of the Doctor saving the world from aliens.
As with all [[:category:Maintenance templates|maintenance templates]], though, the preferred course of action is that you attempt to provide more references yourself, rather than flagging the article and leaving it for someone else to clean up.  Clearly, in the case of the above statement, it would be rather easy for even the most casual fan of ''Doctor Who'' to come up with a bit more than ''The Christmas Invasion'' as an instance of the Doctor saving the world from aliens.

Latest revision as of 01:51, 13 May 2013

{{Facts/doc}} differs from {{fact}} in that it assumes the statement requiring citation is partially true, but that it needs more references than are already provided. This generally happens because the sentence construction implies that there should be more than one reference given.

For instance, let's say you're reading an article and you come across this statement:

Because this statement says that something happened "on many occasions", but only one instance was cited, you need to use {{facts}}, thus:

As with all maintenance templates, though, the preferred course of action is that you attempt to provide more references yourself, rather than flagging the article and leaving it for someone else to clean up. Clearly, in the case of the above statement, it would be rather easy for even the most casual fan of Doctor Who to come up with a bit more than The Christmas Invasion as an instance of the Doctor saving the world from aliens.

However, on those occasions where you come across a statement that does not agree with the number of sources, it is better to flag it than to ignore it altogether.

There's an element of just "using your best judgment" about this template. Don't chastise other editors for using it the "wrong" way. Not everyone knows off the top of their heads the stories which reference the Eye of Orion, but just about anyone can read the statement, The Doctor mentioned the Eye of Orion many times (TV: Attack of the Cybermen), and know that it doesn't quite add up. If the template eventually encourages more sources to appear in articles, then it will have been wise to have used it.

This wiki has a number of templates which put small, inline statements within the body of articles that seek specific improvements in articles. These include:

Attribution request templates
Categorised into articles with statements that need more specific attribution
Primary documentation at {{says who}}
These all do the same thing, but put different, contextually-appropriate phrases into the body of the article:
Clarification request templates
Categorised into articles with statements that need clarification
This indicates that a statement, as worded, makes so little sense that you can't figure out how to improve it. It's not meant as a statement of incredulity. You're not saying with this that you don't believe the statement. You're saying that it's so poorly written that you have no idea what the statement means.
Source request templates
Categorised into articles needing citation
These templates challenge the veracity of a statement, to one degree or another, by indicating that the statement needs better sourcing: