Template:Primary source
How to use
This template is used in articles to identify sentences or short passages which have an inline citation but improperly reference a primary source.
Adding {Primary source inline|date=March 2025} produces a superscripted notation like the following, usually placed immediately after the citation to the primary source:
- Most people believe in ghosts.[1][non-primary source needed]
You can also include a |reason= note, which displays as a tooltip upon mouse hover, to leave a better record for future editors. For example, the following usage might be appropriate in response to the arguable claim that "Most people believe in ghosts":
{Primary source inline|reason=Citation of the results of a survey on the Ghostbusters company website|date=March 2025}
Adding this template to an article places the article into one of a family of categories identifying "Articles with unsourced statements". To find all such articles, see Category:All articles with unsourced statements.
When to use
Use this template to "tag" information or analysis that you believe is improperly or unnecessarily supported by a primary source, so that other editors can see whether this use is appropriate and/or replace it with a citation to a stronger source. Primary sources may be used on Wikipedia, but they need to be handled with care.
"Primary source" does not mean that the author is too close to the subject. As a general rule, primary sources include all scientific journal articles about experiments, "eyewitness" newspaper stories, and historical documents. If you are looking for an independent, third-party source, use {third party inline} instead.
When not to use this template
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately. Do not tag it: delete it.
Even outside of biographies, material which is dubious and potentially harmful may be removed immediately, rather than tagged .
- If no citation is given, use the
{citation needed}tag instead. - If the source given is self-published, use
{self-published inline}. This template also has special features for:- Citing self-published material by recognized experts, which is sometimes permissible for limited purposes.
- Citing biography subjects' non-controversial statements about themselves, which can also be appropriate within certain limits.
- Use
{user-generated inline}if it comes from a user-edited site like another wiki or other publicly editable database. - If you think the author has a conflict of interest or is otherwise too close to the subject, use
{third-party inline}.
If you have the time and ability to find a better reference, please do so. Then correct the citation yourself, or correct the article text. After all, the ultimate goal is not to merely identify problems, but to fix them.
Some editors object to what they perceive as overuse of inline tags, particularly in what is known as "drive-by" tagging, which is applying a dispute or cleanup tag without attempting to address the issues at all. Consider whether adding this tag in an article is the best approach before using it, and use it judiciously.
This template is intended for specific passages which need citation. For articles or sections which have significant material lacking sources (rather than just specific short passages), there are other, more appropriate templates, such as {unreferenced}. If the article as a whole relies on primary sources (rather than the independent, secondary sources required by the content policies), consider adding the {primary sources} tag to the top of the article. It can also be used to flag a section of an article: {primary sources|section}.
Redirects
- {psc}
- {npsn}
See also
- {Primary sources} – the article- or section-level banner version of this template
- Wikipedia:No original research, especially the section Primary, secondary and tertiary sources
- Wikipedia:Secondary does not mean independent, on the difference between a primary source and a source affiliated with the subject
- Wikipedia:Citing sources, especially Unsourced material
- Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup/Verifiability and sources
- Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
Inline templates
- {Citation needed span}, wrapper for a portion of a paragraph to highlight it as needing citation
- {Cite quote}, for "actual quotations" which need citations to make them proper
- {Clarify}, request clarification of wording or interpretation
- {Failed verification}, source was checked, and did not contain the cited material
- {Page needed}, request a page number for an existing citation
- {Request quotation}, request a direct quote from an inaccessible source, for verification purposes
- {Self-published inline}, flag facts in the article as being reliant on self-published source[s] (use outside <ref>)
- {Self-published source} flag the citation itself as being to a self-published source (use inside <ref>)
- {Tertiary source inline}, similar to this template, but for flagging inappropriate citations to tertiary sources (use outside <ref>)
- {Tertiary} – note a citation to a tertiary source that does not sufficiently or at all cite its own sources (use inside <ref>)
- {Third-party inline}, to mark sentences needing an independent or third-party source
- {Unreliable source?}, flag a source as possibly being unreliable and/or unverifiable
- {Verify source}, request that someone verify the cited source backs up the material in the passage
- {User-generated inline} – flag facts in the article as being reliant on a user-generated source or sources (use outside <ref>)
- {User-generated source} – flag the citation itself as being to a user-generated source (use inside <ref>)
Content
- {Dubious} – when a fact is sourced, but verifiability remains dubious
- {Original research inline} – flag something as possibly containing original research
- {POV statement} – dispute the neutrality of a passage
- {Weasel inline} – Avoid weasel words.
- {Who} – for placement after descriptions of a group of persons.
- {According to whom} – placement after mention of a vague third party claim that is not sourced.
Article message box templates
- {Cite check}, article/section may have inappropriate or misinterpreted citations
- {Refimprove}, article/section has weak or incomplete sources/references/citations
- {Third-party}, whole article contains zero independent/third-party references
- {Unreferenced}, article/section has no sources/references/citations given at all
| Attribution |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clarity |
| ||||||
| Miscellaneous |
| ||||||
| Neutrality |
| ||||||
| Precision |
| ||||||
| Time-sensitivity |
| ||||||
| Verifiability |
| ||||||
| Wording |
| ||||||
| General advice |
| ||||||
| |||||||
To identify sentences or short passages which have an inline citation but improperly reference a primary source.
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reason for request | reason | A note, which displays as a tooltip upon mouse hover
| String | optional |
| Month and year | date | Month and year of tagging; e.g., 'January 2013', but not 'jan13'
| String | suggested |