Dispute templates are used to alert other editors that work is needed on a certain article, and auto-categorize pages so that patrolling editors can aid their talent to the problem. The primary purpose of this page is to display and discuss the use of these sometimes controversial aids to joint edit collaboration.
They should normally not be used without a clear description from the applying editor of the rationale, preferably presented in a numbered list form on the article's talk page, in a section which includes the name of the template that was applied. As these items are dealt with, it is suggested each line be struck through. Some guidance should be given by the posting editor as to what action will resolve the matter when using section and article (page) tagging templates.
It is preferable that in-line templates be applied to content that is being objected to on bias or fact grounds.
Inline templates are preferred because they can be attached directly to disputed sentences. Section templates follow next in preference to tagging a whole article.
Many editors consider use of any banner template in an article a serious measure of last resort, and would prefer other measures be exhausted before such detractions from the project be used. If one must be used, please make a thorough note listing deficiencies or items being disputed in bulleted or numbered paragraph format under a clear notice section heading on the article's talk page.
Please remember to use these appropriately, and use the most specific messages you can find for the situation
The factual accuracy of part of this article is disputed. The dispute is about The topic of dispute. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page before making changes.(February 2013)
The truthfulness of this article has been questioned. It is believed that some or all of its content might constitute a hoax. Please add reliable sources for the claims in the article or section, or comment on the article's talk page. If the claims cannot be reliably sourced, consider placing the article at articles for deletion and/or removing the section in question. For blatant hoaxes, use {{db-hoax}} to identify it for speedy deletion instead.
This article may document a neologism in such a manner as to promote it. Please add more reliable sources to establish its current use and the impact the term has had on its field. Otherwise consider renaming or deleting the article.
The neutrality of this article's title, subject matter, and/or the title's implications, is disputed. This is a dispute over the neutrality of viewpoints or other implications of the title, or the subject matter within its scope, rather than the actual facts stated. Wikipedia articles may have only one unique title; the use of the current title does not imply an endorsement of that title. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page.(February 2013)
This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. Please improve the article by adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the talk page.
This date-flagged ఆత్మకథ అయి ఉండవచ్చు. లేదా వ్యాసవిషయమైన వ్యక్తి గాని, వారికి సంబంధించిన సంస్థ గానీ చాలా ఎక్కువ దిద్దుబాటు చేసి ఉండవచ్చు.. వికీపీడియా తటస్థ దృక్కోణం విధానానికి అనుగుణంగా దీన్ని సవరించాల్సి ఉండవచ్చు. చర్చ పేజీలో దీనికి సంబంధించిన చర్చ ఉండి ఉండవచ్చు.
Articles which are autobiographies and may not be NPOV because of that, with the date at which they were flagged.
This article or section reads like a scientific review article. It potentially contains biasedsyntheses of primary sources. Please replace inadequate primary references with secondary sources such as scientific review articles. See the talk page for details.
This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.(February 2013)
Pages that read like a magazine article instead of the formal tones expected of an encyclopedia.
ఈ వ్యాసం విజ్ఞాన సర్వస్వ వ్యాసం లాగా కాక, ఓ కథ లాగా ఉంది. వికీపీడియా నాణ్యతా ప్రమాణాలకు అనుగుణంగా ఉండడం కోసము, తటస్థంగా ఉండడం కోసమూ వ్యక్తిగత అభిరుచిలో ఉన్న వ్యాస ధోరణిని సవరించి, వికీ సాంప్రదాయిక ధోరణికి మార్చండి.(February 2013)
Pages that read like a narrative and tell a story rather than providing encyclopedic information.
The relevance of particular information in (or previously in) this article or section is disputed. The information may have been removed or included by an editor as a result. Please see discussion on the talk page considering whether its inclusion is warranted.(February 2013)
ఈ వ్యాసంలో అస్పష్టమైన, సంశయాత్మక పదాలను వాడారు: ఇలాంటి పదాలు సాధరణంగా పక్షపాతంతో కూడుకుని గానీ, నిర్ధారించుకోలేని సమాచారంతో కూడుకుని గానీ ఉంటాయి. అలాంటి సమాచారాన్ని తగు మూలాలతో విశదీకరించాలి లేదా తొలగించాలి.(February 2013)
ఈ వ్యాసంలోని పదజాలం అంశాన్ని వ్యక్తిగత ధోరణిలో వాస్తవిక సమాచారంతో సంబంధం లేకుండా ప్రశంసిస్తున్న ధోరణిలో ఉంది. దయచేసి అంశం ప్రాముఖ్యతను అటువంటి పదజాలం ద్వారా కాక వాటిని తొలగించడమో, మార్చడమో చేసి, అంశం ప్రాముఖ్యతను వాస్తవాలు, తగిన వ్యాఖ్యల ఆధారంగా వివరించండి.(February 2013)
This article is missing information about Info. Please expand the article to include this information. Further details may exist on the talk page.(February 2013)
Article or section where information not present may be worthy of inclusion
On an article where a self-published (online or in print) source is cited, and is therefore not legitimately citable as a secondary source, according to policy.
This article or section lacks a single coherent topic. Please help improve this వికీపీడియా page by rewording sentences, removing irrelevant information, or splitting the article into multiple articles. Specific concerns may appear on the talk page.
Section where some sentences in a section or the text as a whole does not relay an understandable message
This section may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, controversies or matters relative to the article subject as a whole. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message.
Sections or text where a matter such as a controversy or incident has been given more weight than is appropriate in the context of the article or biography as a whole.
After passages mentioning general groups (such as "many scientists") that could be made more specific by naming (and citing sources for) specific individuals. in-line
This template is misplaced. It belongs on the talk page:వికీపీడియా చర్చ:Template messages/Disputes.The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed.
Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.