Template:Original research inline
In this article, we will explore the topic of Template:Original research inline in depth. From its origins to its relevance today, we will put under the magnifying glass all aspects related to Template:Original research inline. Our goal is to offer our readers a complete and detailed view of this topic, providing invaluable information that allows them to better understand its importance and impact in various areas. Through an exhaustive analysis and the presentation of relevant data, we are going to delve into Template:Original research inline to unravel its implications and its scope in different contexts. Without a doubt, Template:Original research inline is a highly relevant topic that deserves careful examination, and that is precisely what we will do in the following pages. So get ready to embark on a fascinating journey through Template:Original research inline.
 | This template is used on approximately 4,000 pages and changes may be widely noticed. Test changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in your own user subpage. Consider discussing changes on the talk page before implementing them. |
This template tag will categorise tagged articles into Category:Articles that may contain original research but not this template itself. This template is a self-reference and so is part of the Wikipedia project rather than the encyclopedic content.
The intention of this tag is to nudge fellow editors who may inadvertently (or otherwise) introduce text that appears based upon original research, into supporting such text through demonstrating its previously researched origins. This tag provides a good faith means for editors to allow given text of fellow editors to remain temporarily in a given article until such time as the text's previously researched origins are supported. In the event that researched origins for the text are not produced after a relatively small passage of time (i.e., no more than a few days), the tagging editor would generally be right in assuming that it could be edited or otherwise removed from the article to comply with Wikipedia:No original research. When a given editor adds this template they must concurrently add corresponding text to the tagged article's talk page to explain their concerns relative to original research for the given tagged text unless talk already exists relative to such concerns. If a given article has been tagged and the tagging editor doesn't ensure that corresponding article talk relative to the tag isn't either already available or added within a short amount of time (i.e., no more than 24 hours) then fellow editors are within their rights to remove the tag or alternatively, add talk in support of its use.
Usage
{{Original research inline|date=May 2024}}
- This template's usage is simple, after a passage of text in a given article that appears to be original research one simply tacks on
{{Original research inline}}to specify that particular passage as likely being of questionable origin. Do not forget to ensure that there is corresponding article talk to explain one's usage of this tag.- For example in the original article the following text may appear:
- Based upon the theories of some ancient religious scholars the world is indeed flat.
- To mark this particular passage merely edit in
{{Original research inline}}at the end of "flat." so that it will appear in this way:- Based upon the theories of some ancient religious scholars the world is indeed flat.
- For example in the original article the following text may appear:
Do not use this tag to label text which appears false or doubtful, especially in the case of biographies of living people (see this section of WP:3RR as well). In the case of text that appears false or doubtful and is not part of a biography of a living person then move such text to the discussion page and ask for citations of previous research there, otherwise remove it.
The parameter |certain=y (or |certain=true, etc.) will remove the "?" and display it as:
Template data
TemplateData for Original research inline
This template is used to identify statements that use analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources, or to indicate text which appears to be the unsourced, unpublished conclusions of someone's personal findings. It is normally used without any added parameters, though a date parameter may be set when the tag is placed (if not, the date will be added by a bot later). This template takes no other parameters.
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Month and year | date | Provides the month and year; e.g., 'January 2013', but not 'jan13'
| String | suggested |
| Certainty indicator | certain | If set to any value such as y, yes, true, etc., it will remove the '?' and show ''. | String | optional |
Redirects
See also
- {{Original research span}} — Similar, but the specific text with OR issues is highlighted for clarity
- {{Original research}} — Original research banner template for top of article
- {{Original research section}} — Same, but for section
- {{Synthesis inline}} — The content near this template may contain improper synthesis
- {{Synthesis}} — Article or section may contain improper synthesis (banner template)
- {{Unreferenced}} — Not even a single source is referenced in the article (banner template)
