User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Time Lord Academy/@comment-188432-20130502225117: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\5\2/\4-\3, -'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-(.*?)'''([\s\S]*) ?\{\{retitle\|///(.*?)\}\} +{{retitle|\2/\5}}\n'''User:\1/\2/@comment-\3'''\4)) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{retitle|The Time Lord Academy/Flagging sentences in articles}} | |||
We have a variety of templates for indicating when a '''whole article''' needs attention. Most editors are probably aware of {{tlx|delete}}, {{tlx|update}}, {{tlx|merge}}, {{tlx|cleanup}} and the like. | We have a variety of templates for indicating when a '''whole article''' needs attention. Most editors are probably aware of {{tlx|delete}}, {{tlx|update}}, {{tlx|merge}}, {{tlx|cleanup}} and the like. | ||
But you may not know about our simpler templates for marking individual '''''sentences''''' for review. If you've ever used Wikipedia, you'll recognise the style of these templates, and maybe even one or two of the names. But here's a list of some very useful "little" templates: | But you may not know about our simpler templates for marking individual '''''sentences''''' for review. If you've ever used Wikipedia, you'll recognise the style of these templates, and maybe even one or two of the names. But here's a list of some very useful "little" templates: | ||
{{inline guide}} | {{inline guide}} | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Time Lord Academy/20130502225117-188432]]</noinclude> |
Latest revision as of 00:48, 28 April 2023
We have a variety of templates for indicating when a whole article needs attention. Most editors are probably aware of {{delete}}, {{update}}, {{merge}}, {{cleanup}} and the like.
But you may not know about our simpler templates for marking individual sentences for review. If you've ever used Wikipedia, you'll recognise the style of these templates, and maybe even one or two of the names. But here's a list of some very useful "little" templates:
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.
- {{what}}
- 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:
- {{fact}} or {{source}}
- {{disputed}}
- {{facts}}, categorised into articles needing additional citations