Template:Source assess/doc

From MOASSpedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This template creates a row in a source assessment table, corresponding to a single source being assessed with respect to the general notability guideline (GNG). It is meant for use in deletion discussions. It must be enclosed in template {{source assess table}}.

The use of this template does not imply a final or consensus view of how any given source should be assessed. Though it may be used to summarize a developing consensus, it may also reflect the assessments of a single editor in the course of a discussion.

Background

The GNG is a general benchmark for assessing the presumed notability of article topics. From the GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." The GNG and other guidelines expand on what is meant by "significant coverage", "reliability", and "independence".

This template (with {{source assess table}}) provides a visually clear means of presenting as assessment of sources against each of these three criteria, as well as an overall assessment derived from these criterion assessments.

Usage

Full parameter names:

{{ source_assess
| source       =     <!-- Source (link or citation template)               -->
| independence =     <!-- y/n/-/? -->
| ind_just     =     <!-- Justification of independence assessment                   -->
| reliability  =     <!-- y/n/-/? -->
| rel_just     =     <!-- Justification of reliability assessment                    -->
| significance =     <!-- y/n/-/? -->
| sig_just     =     <!-- Justification of significance of coverage assessment       -->
}}

Abbreviated form:

{{SA
| src = 
| i =  | ij =     
| r =  | rj = 
| s =  | sj = 
}}

Parameters

Any parameter except for source can be skipped or left blank.

Parameter Purpose Notes
source or src The source being assessed Should contain, at the very least, a link to the source being assessed; it may contain any other useful information, including {{citation}} templates.
independence or ind or i Discrete assessment of whether the source meets the criterion Allowed assessment values:
Value Output Meaning
"y" (or equivalent per template {{yesno}}) [justification] The source meets the criterion
"n" (or equivalent per template {{yesno}}) [justification] The source does not meet the criterion
"-" (hyphen) [justification] The source partially meets the criterion
"?" ? [justification] It has not been or cannot be determined whether the source meets the criterion
[blank, or any other value] It has not been assessed whether the source meets the criterion
reliability or rel or r
significance or sig or s
ind_just or ij Justification for the corresponding assessment These arguments are not strictly required, but their use is highly encouraged; deletion discussions are evaluated on the basis of well-supported arguments based on policy and guidelines.
rel_just or rj
sig_just or sj

Example

{{ source assess table
| user=Example <!-- Optional -->
|
{{ source assess   <!-- first source -->
| source   = http://www.example_source1.com/doc1
| ind      = y | ind_just = 
| rel      = y | rel_just = The source is a noted book by a well-known author
| sig      = y | sig_just = The source discusses the subject directly and in detail
}}
{{ source assess   <!-- second source -->
| source   = http://www.example_source2.com/page1
| ind      = y | ind_just = 
| rel      = ? | rel_just = This is a self-published source, and the expertise of its author has not been established
| sig      =   | sig_just = 
}}
{{ source assess   <!-- third source -->
| source   = http://www.example_source3.com/file1
| ind      = y | ind_just = 
| rel      = y | rel_just = The source is a major newspaper
| sig      = - | sig_just = The article mentions the subject briefly, but does not offer much detail
}}
{{ source assess   <!-- fourth source -->
| source   = http://www.example_source4.org/doc1
| ind      = n | ind_just = The subject works for this publication
| rel      = y | rel_just = This publication is a highly cited scholarly journal
| sig      = y | sig_just = The article discusses the subject directly and in detail
}}
}}
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Example
(This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.)
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
http://www.example_source1.com/doc1 Yes Yes The source is a noted book by a well-known author Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail Yes
http://www.example_source2.com/page1 Yes ? This is a self-published source, and the expertise of its author has not been established ? Unknown
http://www.example_source3.com/file1 Yes Yes The source is a major newspaper The article mentions the subject briefly, but does not offer much detail — Partial
http://www.example_source4.org/doc1 No The subject works for this publication Yes This publication is a highly cited scholarly journal Yes The article discusses the subject directly and in detail No
Table created using {{source assess table}}

"Overall" assessment

The template computes an overall assessment of whether the source should count toward meeting WP:GNG, based on the three criteria. This overall assessment is determined as follows:

If... Overall assessment Meaning
All three criteria are "yes" Yes The source supports the case that the article meets GNG
At least one criterion is "–", and none are "no", "?", or blank — Partial The source partially supports the case that the article meets GNG
Any of the criteria are "?" or blank, and none are "no" ? Unknown The value of the source with respect to GNG has not been or cannot be determined
Any of the criteria are "no" No The source does not support the case that the article meets GNG

See also