Template talk:Only primary sources
Should this not be renamed to {{Primary sources section}} as it relates to {{Primary sources}} as {{Unreferenced section}} relates to {{Unreferenced}}? Vexations (talk) 18:31, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hey Vexations. As far as I know (and please correct me if I'm wrong, as it's very possible), it should only be renamed to that if the purpose of the template is for a section-equivalent of the main template. When I created this template, the purpose of it was not to use {{Primary sources}} for a specific section - it was to be used on articles that ONLY reference primary sources, and have {{Primary sources}} for articles that just reference too many primary sources. Renaming this template to {{Primary sources section}} would also mean completely changing the template as well as the meaning of the template. Please realize I'm not saying that would be a bad thing at all, I'm just saying that it's something to consider :). Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 00:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
RfC of potential interest[edit]
An RfC is underway that could affect this template and may therefor be of interest to watchers of this page. The discussion is located at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle#RfC regarding Twinkle maintenance tags that recommend the inclusion of additional sources. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 05:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)