|This template was considered for deletion on 2007 September 1. The result of the discussion was "keep".|
|A list of persistently discussed material which illustrates how current consensus came to be can be found at this subpage.|
RfC of potential interestEdit
Adding a |source= argumentEdit
This template will soon be added by bot per the RfC: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Bot_to_add_Template:Unreferenced_and_Template:No_footnotes_to_pages_(single_run) - it's possible the bot could add around 25,000 instances, the template is currently around 220,000, so it would be about a 10% increase.
The RfC close suggested opening a discussion about adding a source argument eg.
|source=GreenC bot or
|bot=GreenC bot. The closer recommend putting these cases into a separate hidden category such as Category:Articles lacking sources detected by bot or something.
I would recommend to avoid fragmentation, the new bot category be in addition to the original category ie. if a
|source= exists, add it to both Category:Articles lacking sources detected by bot and Category:All articles lacking sources. So those working through the original category are not missing entries that were added to the bot category (this concern was raised by other editors who do this work). -- GreenC 17:04, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- I would prefer
|bot= for consistency with other templates that have similar parameters. Do we really need a category for bot added instances though? — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
|bot= is good. A number of others said the same thing about not having an extra hidden cat. The couple RfC participants seemed concerned about a "flood" of new instances overwhelming the current category, but I estimate maybe a 10% increase which is hard to justify the overhead of maintaining a new category IMO. If someone really wants it later on, we can easily add it. If someone wants to know which articles the bot edited, I believe this can be done by searching on edit comment strings. -- GreenC 15:25, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed. If we're not adding a category or visual indicator, then the template doesn't need to be changed since the parameter wouldn't do anything. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Adding |status= argumentEdit
|This edit request has been answered. Set the |
|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GreenC bot 17 is a new BRFA related to this template. This template would have a new argument
|status= that accepts either
|status=nobot (i'm not stuck on these names they are only suggestions). If
|status=hasaref is set, the article is added to a new tracking category Category:All articles possibly lacking sources.
The idea is to flag articles that have this template but maybe don't need it any longer as the article contains what the bot thinks are references. Humans make the final determination and do any fixup work. It uses the WP:TAGBOT system so only a small number of articles are checked at a time and users would need to clear the tracking category before new bot runs can be made (on-demand). This keeps the intelligence about articles fresh/accurate, and avoids a giant list of outdated info.
I'm not familiar enough with the template and would need help in adding the argument and tracking cat. -- GreenC 16:41, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- I figured out how to add all2. -- GreenC 14:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 9 November 2019Edit