Template:According to whom/sandbox
Nowadays, Template:According to whom/sandbox has become a topic of great interest to a wide spectrum of people around the world. From its impact on society to its influence on people's daily lives, Template:According to whom/sandbox is a topic that has aroused great interest in different areas. Both experts in the field and ordinary people have dedicated time and effort to understanding and analyzing Template:According to whom/sandbox, seeking to obtain a better understanding of its importance and impact on different aspects of life. In this article, we will explore some of the most relevant aspects related to Template:According to whom/sandbox, with the aim of offering a comprehensive view on this topic that is of great relevance today.
 | This is the template sandbox page for Template:According to whom (diff). |
 | This template is used on approximately 4,700 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. |
Usage
You may append a date to the template in the following format:
{{According to whom|date=December 2025}}
The template may also be used to highlight the questionable passage in the text:
- "The moon is considered to have
{{According to whom|water, cream cheese}}and potato salad." produces
- "The moon is considered to have water, cream cheese[according to whom?] and potato salad."
When to use
This tag is for placement after mention of a vague, third-party claim that is not sourced, such as "considered", "noted as", "nicknamed", "lauded as the world's ", "labeled", and the like.
Use this tag when no specific examples of identifiable individuals or groups are named who could be used to verify the statements or beliefs that appear in the tagged passage of the article.
Do not use this tag for material that is already supported by an inline citation. If you want to know who holds that view, all you have to do is look at the source named at the end of the sentence or paragraph. It is not necessary to inquire "According to whom?" in that circumstance.
Alternatives
- Sometimes, the offending statement should be made more specific by using in-text attribution to identify particular individuals who hold this position, and then either supplied with an inline citation showing that this person or group holds this position, or tagged as needing citation.
- Extremely vague statements ("Alice Expert enjoys broad support") should normally be removed.
- Unsourced statements that say or imply something controversial about a living person should be removed immediately.
- Do not use this tag if naming the individuals who hold a position would be silly because of the number. Facts that are widely held should be asserted as simple facts. Do not use in-text attribution to imply that a widely held view is a minority position. Thus, we write simply that "The Earth is round", not "Scientists like Suren Ayvazyan, Teki Biçoku, Donald Canfield, Ricardo Cirera, Hartley T. Ferrar, Nicolae Frolov, Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain, Manuel Santillán (and about a million others) say that the Earth is round."
This tag will categorize tagged articles into Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases.
TemplateData
Inline cleanup tag clarifying that attribution of a claim is needed
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| content | 1 | Span of content needing clarification | Content | optional |
| Date | date | Month and year the template was added
| Date | suggested |
See also
- {{Peacock}} – message-box
- {{Weasel}} – message-box
- {{Compared to?}}
- Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup § Neutrality and factual accuracy
Redirects to this template
|
|---|
