Template talk:Sources needed

Title: one that no one will ever remember. How about "sources needed"? ħuman 04:28, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

That seems fine to me. Lyra § talk 04:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Or in RW internet slang "moar sauces plz" ^gnostic 08:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's go easy with this template, I know we want sources, but many articles are simply written by people who know what they are talking about. There might be be better, subtler ways to get sources.^{[citation needed]} ħuman 09:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, though this is useful for flagging up ones that are either A) completely devoid of refs and further reading (I have to say that I'm more for "further reading" than I am for referenced statements), such as the Nietzsche one I just added it to as a test or B) are complete fact-tag soup, which I don't think we have because we're often a little sparse with that. ^gnostic 09:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hate this template

It doesn't say what needs to be cited. Ty^Annoy 18:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Everything, surely? Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 18:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

It's slightly cleaner than making {{fact}}-soup out of an article. ^narchist 18:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)