 | This template is used onapproximately 14,000 pages and changes may be widely noticed. Test changes in the template's/sandbox or/testcases subpages, or in your ownuser subpage. Consider discussing changes on thetalk page before implementing them. |
This template is intended to be used when a statement is sourced but it is questionable whether the source used isreliable for supporting the statement. It produces a superscripted notation like the following:
Articles tagged with this template will be categorized intoCategory:All articles lacking reliable references.
Place this template inline,{{Unreliable source?|date=October 2025}} following the questionable source. The template should be placedoutside and immediately after the reference to the questionable source (<ref> ... </ref>), within the article's text:
<ref>some alleged source for this</ref>{{Unreliable source?|date=October 2025}} Next sentence.The template has the following optional parameters:
{{Unreliable source?|date=October 2025}}{{Unreliable source?|reason=Your WP:RS-based reason here.|date=October 2025}}|reason= parameter, and only after a good faith attempt to verify the reliability of the source in question. Example:{{Unreliable source?|sure=y|reason=Your WP:RS-based reason here.|date=October 2025}} NOTE: This parameter has an alias,|failed=, which may make more grammatical sense when used with certain redirects like{{verify credibility}}.This template should be used to express your doubt about the credibility of a source.
This tag should not be used onunreliably sourced contentious statements about living persons; if a source for such a statement is not reliable, the statement and the source should beremoved immediately.
For whole articles or article sections that rely on suspect sources, considering using the banner template{{More citations needed}} or{{More citations needed section}}, respectively, rather than individually tagging a large number of statements.
For sources promotingfringe theories and pseudo-science, the more specific template{{Unreliable fringe source}} can be used. Even more specifically, flagimproperly sourced medical claims with{{Unreliable medical source}}.
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 verificationand have a questionable would-be source, consider removal of the source (and possibly the statement) over using both tags.
TemplateData for Unreliable source?
Used when a statement is sourced but it is questionable whether the source used is reliable for supporting the statement.
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reason | reason | Note explaining why you think the source is unreliable as per WP:RS. Displays as a tool tip | String | optional |
| Certain? | certainsurefailed | 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
| Boolean | optional |
| Month and year | date | Month and year of tagging; e.g., 'January 2013', but not 'jan13'
| String | suggested |
| Displayed tag text | name | Text displayed by the in-line tag between the square brackets
| String | optional |
{{Better source needed}}, an alternative to{{Unreliable source?|certain=y}}; especially useful for tagging sources that are low-quality but not necessarily wrong{{Dubious}}, for questionable claims that seem unlikely to be properly sourceable{{Obsolete source}}, for when a source has been surpassed by more recent works{{Primary source inline}}, formisuse of primary source material{{Unreliable fringe source}}, forfringe sources{{Unreliable medical source}}, forfringe medical sources in particular
