Can this template place articles in Category:Articles needing additional references instead of Category:Articles lacking sources. Category:Articles lacking sources is for no references at all. Mattg82 (talk) 23:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
This template ends with a trio of links "(help, talk, get involved!)". It's been like that since 2006 - I don't know if this was a template ending that used to be standard and has since been dropped almost everywhere, but it looks strikingly out of place because no other template ends like this.
Looks like someone removed it in 2012 and got reverted; I removed it earlier today and User:Debresser put it back because "Removal was not discussed", so here we go. What do people think? Is it worth dropping, rewriting as sentences, or leaving intact? --McGeddon (talk) 15:01, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "may contain" to the less ambiguous "possibly contains" much like this template. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)