Template:Dubious/doc

Add Dubious after a specific statement or alleged fact that is sourced but that nevertheless seems dubious or unlikely. Most commonly, this involves uncertainty regarding the veracity or accuracy of the given source, or of an editor's interpretation of that source.

Purpose
The purposes of this template are:
 * to point out uncertainty over conflicting sources
 * to question the veracity, accuracy, or methodology employed by a given source
 * to express concerns that the source may have been misinterpreted
 * to alert editors that additional sources need to be found, to ascertain the statement's validity

Note: Refer to the Incorrect uses section below for examples of inappropriate uses, and suggested alternatives.

Usage
When using this template, it is strongly suggested to simultaneously discuss the dubious statement on the article's talk page – and to point this template to a specific talk page section (either new or existing) which contains that discussion. To do so, use the following syntax:


 * Note, do not include Talk:PAGE#, just the section title.
 * Note, do not include Talk:PAGE#, just the section title.

Do not add this template to a page more than a reasonable number of times. Please consider using one of the other templates mentioned below instead.

Parameters

 * Talk section name – the first field should point to the section name on the talk page which contains the discussion.
 * If the section name contains an equal sign, use the following syntax:.
 * Other special characters used in section names (such as brackets, "[" and "]") may need to be encoded. For example, the markup:
 * would produce:
 * would produce:


 * date – the month and year when the template was added. Example: undefined.
 * reason – Because it may not be immediately apparent to other editors what about the tagged passage is questionable, it may be helpful to add a brief reason for the tag:  (this is preferable to using an HTML   after the tag, as it is tidier to keep all of the -related code inside the template). If the explanation would be lengthy, use the article's talk page. As well as being visible in the source code for editors' benefit, the   parameter is, if provided, displayed as a tooltip when the mouse is hovered over the "clarification needed" link in the article.

Incorrect uses
This template is not to be used
 * to directly challenge a sourced statement as being incorrect (with sources to back up your claim). Use Disputed-inline instead.
 * to flag unsourced statements, unless you think they are incorrect. Use Citation needed instead.
 * to question the reliability / verifiability of a source. Use Unreliable source? instead.
 * to request verification whether the source in fact says as the statement claims. Use Verify source instead.
 * to request that a difficult-to-understand statement be re-written. Use Clarify instead.

If you believe that a statement is both unverifiable and probably wrong, then you should consider removing it from the article (and perhaps copying it to the talk page with an explanation) instead of tagging it.

TemplateData
{	"description": "Use this template to tag a specific statement or alleged fact that is sourced but which nevertheless seems dubious or unlikely to be correct.", "format": "inline", "params": { "1": {			"label": "Section name on talk page", "description": "Section name on talk page where further information or discussion can be found", "type": "string" },		"date": { "label": "Month and year", "description": "Month and year of tagging; e.g., 'January 2013', but not 'jan13'", "type": "string", "autovalue": " ", "example": "January 2013", "suggested": true },		"reason": { "description": "A brief summary of the problem, to be displayed on hover", "type": "string" }	},	"paramOrder": [ "1",		"date", "reason" ] }