Template:Unreliable medical source/doc
This is a documentation subpage for Template:Unreliable medical source. It may contain usage information, categories and other content that is not part of the original template page. |
Alternatives:
|
Usage
[edit]This template is intended to be used when a statement about medicine or health (including veterinary, psychiatric, etc.) is sourced but it is questionable whether the source used is medically reliable for supporting the statement. It produces a superscripted notation like the following:
- The treatment is definitely effective.[unreliable medical source?]
Articles tagged with this template will be categorized into Category:All articles lacking reliable references.
Place this template inline, {{Unreliable medical source|date=November 2024}}
following the questionable claim (and any punctuation attached to it). The template should be placed outside the reference (<ref> ... </ref>
), within the article's text:
- Potentially controversial statement.
<ref>some alleged source for this</ref>{{Unreliable medical source|date=November 2024}}
Next sentence.
When to use and not use this template
[edit]This template should be used to express doubt about the credibility of a source for a medical claim.
This tag should not be used on unreliably sourced contentious statements about living persons; if the source is not reliable, the statement should be removed immediately.
For whole articles or article sections that rely on poor medical sources, considering using the banner template {{medref}}
or {{medref|section}}
, respectively, rather than individually tagging a large number of statements.
For sources promoting non-medical fringe theories and pseudo-science, the variant template {{Unreliable fringe source}}
can be used.
For sources unreliable for reasons other than promotion of dubious scientific claims, the more general template {{Unreliable source?}}
can be used.
This tag should not be used to indicate that the sourced material could not be found within a given source. In that case, {{failed verification}}
is a better template. For statements that have failed verification and have a questionable would-be source, consider removal of the source (and possibly the statement) over using both tags.
Parameters
[edit]The template has the following optional parameters:
- date: should be set to the month and year when the article was tagged. Example:
{{Unreliable medical source|date=November 2024}}
- reason: a note explaining why you think the source is unreliable as per WP:MEDRS. Displays as a tool tip. Keep it short (one sentence) as longer material belongs on the talk page. It is good to reiterate the reason in your edit summary. Example:
{{Unreliable medical source|reason=Your WP:MEDRS-based reason here.|date=November 2024}}
- sure or certain: if set to "y" or "yes" will remove the question mark from the template's output to denote a degree of certainty that the source is unreliable. Please use this with a
reason
parameter, and only after a good faith attempt to verify the reliability of the source in question. Example:{{Unreliable medical source|sure=y|reason=Your WP:RS-based reason here.|date=November 2024}}
Template data
[edit]TemplateData for Unreliable medical source
An inline maintenance tag that generates the text "[unreliable medical source?]"
Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Reason | reason | no description | String | suggested |
Certain? | sure certain | no description
| Boolean | optional |
Date | date | no description
| String | required |
Redirects
[edit]See also
[edit]Inline templates
[edit]{{Medical citation needed}}
, for requesting a citation to a medically reliable source instead of or in addition to a non-medical one already present{{Medical citation needed span}}
, same as above, except it highlights the text that needs a medical reference{{Better source}}
, an alternative to{{Unreliable source|certain=y}}
; especially useful for tagging sources that are low-quality but not necessarily wrong{{Obsolete source}}
, for when a source has been surpassed by more recent works{{Unreliable fringe source}}
, for non-medical pseudo-science sourcing{{Unreliable source?}}
, for unreliable but non-fringe sources{{Primary source inline}}
, for non-medical misuse of primary source material{{Dubious}}
, for questionable claims that seem unlikely to be properly sourceable{{Disputed inline}}
, stronger than dubious, may indicate sources in conflict with each other
More templates
[edit]{{More medical citations needed}}
, a banner template for flagging an entire article or section as relying on poor (or no) medical sources for medical claims{{Reliable medical sources please}}
, a note for user talk pages with links to WP:MEDRS{{More citations needed}}
, a banner template for flagging entire article or section as needing better sourcing generally{{Reliable sources for medical articles}}
, a banner for placing on an article's talk page- Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup/Verifiability and sources
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles
{{Uw-medrs}}
, a user warning for placing on a user's talk page with links to MEDRS
Policies, guidelines, essays, and WikiProjects
[edit]Medicine-specific
[edit]- Vickers, Tim and Eubulides (30 June 2008). "Dispatches: Sources in biology and medicine"". The Wikipedia Signpost.
- Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)
- Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (science)
- Wikipedia:Reliable source examples § Physical sciences and medicine
- Wikipedia:Current science and technology sources
- Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest (medicine)
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Resources, external resources useful for writing medicine related content
General
[edit]- Wikipedia:Citing sources, especially § Unsourced material
- Wikipedia:Independent sources
- Wikipedia:Reliable sources
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability