Nacrt:Uklanjanje šablona za održavanje

Mnoge stranice na Vikipediji prikazuju šablone za održavanje koji ukazuju na probleme sa temom ili sadržajem stranice. Možda ste stigli na ovu stranicu pomoći nakon što ste kliknuli na vezu u takvom šablonu za održavanje, koja je glasila „o uklanjanju šablona obaveštenja”.

Šablone za održavanje dodaju i uklanjaju volonteri. Ova stranica za pomoć objašnjava proces ispitivanja i uklanjanja takvih šablona.

Pregled

Šabloni za održavanje (ili „oznaka”) generalno se ne uklanjaju automatski. Čak i kada popravite greške opisane u šablonu za održavanje, oznaka će ostati na članku, dok je vi ili neko drugi ne ukloni ručno. Mehanika uklanjanja je obično jednostavna kao što je klik na dugme „Uredi” na vrhu stranice ili u odeljku (ukoliko niste već u režimu uređivanja), uklanjanje koda koji proizvodi prikaz šablona, ostavljanje opisa izmene i čuvanje izmena na stranici.

Nije u redu da uklanjate šablone za održavanje sve dok se prvo problem naznačen u šablonu ne popravi—to jest, samo kada oznaka za održavanje više nije validna, osim ako ona zaista ne pripada na prvom mestu.

Vikipedija funkcioniše zbog napora volontera kao što ste vi, čineći odvažne izmene da bi pomogli u izgradnji ove enciklopedije. Rešavanje problema, a zatim uklanjanje šablona za održavanje kada završite, važno je u tim naporima.

Rešavanje naznačenog problema

Ne znamo koja vas je oznaka za održavanje dovela na ovu stranicu i na koji se određeni problem treba obratiti pažnja. Međutim, svaki šablon za održavanje sadrži veze na stranice pomoći, smernice ili druge relevantne stranice koje pružaju informacije o problemu koji je naznačen. Takođe ćete pronaći smernice za neke od najčešćih šablona ispod.

Mnogi uobičajeni šabloni za održavanje se odnose na probleme s referencama u članku, odnosno njihov nedostatak— zato što je pouzdano referenciranje žila kukavica članaka na Vikipediji i srž svih Viki politika i smernica, kao što su: prepoznatljivost, proverljivost, neutralna tačka gledišta i bez originalnog istraživanja. Mnoštvo drugih pitanja mogu biti označena uključujući ton i stil pisanja, strukturu teksta, nedostatak veza iz ili do drugih članaka koji je u saglasnosti sa Vikipedijinim priručnikom o stilu pisanja.

Pre nego što uklonite šablon, proverite da li je problem ispravljen. To zahteva određeni napor s vaše strane - da razumete problem i kako da ga rešite.

Primer

Ako je problem označen šablonom za održavanje, to označava da članak ne sadrži nijednu referencu koja bi pouzdano podržala naveden tekst. Za označavanje ovakvih člankova može se koristiti šablon {{unreferenced}} tipično postavljen na početku viki koda tokom uređivanja članka. „Kod” šablona može izgledati ovako: {{Unreferenced|date=april 2024}}.

Važno je shvatiti da ono što vidite kada čitate članak i ono što vidite kad ga uređujete - nije isto. Dakle, kad uređujete članak vidite „kod” ali kad čitate članak vidite ovo:

Primer:

Ovaj obrazac sadrži brojne veze, koje su označene rečima i frazama u plavoj boji. Tri od ovih veza vode prema stranicama koje, kada se pretražuju, pružaju kontekst i resurse kako biste shvatili zašto je obrazac postavljen na stranicu i kako da se pozabavite problemom članka koji nema reference:

• "citirajte", citirajte izvore; Više o tome: Uputstva/Ne zaboravite;
• "Izvori", koji se vežu za viki politiku proverljivosti
• "dodavanje citata u pouzdane izvore".

Bez obzira na to da li vas je oznaka za održavanje dovela do ove stranice, trebala bi sadržavati relevantna objašnjenja vezane za bilo koji problem. Pročitajte sledeće savete kako bi ste kontekstualno saznali o problemu i šta je potrebno da uradite kako bi ste taj problem rešili.

Kada ukloniti

Šabloni za održavanje nisu namenjeni da ostanu trajno na članku. Svaki korisnik bez sukoba interesa može da ukloni šablon za održavanje u bilo kojoj od sledećih okolnosti:

1. Kada je problem adekvatno adresiran;
2. Kada se utvrdi da je problem rešen (možda od strane nekog drugog);
3. Ponekad neko može postaviti šablon iako mu tu nije mesto ili jednostavno greškom. Savetuje se da prvenstveno porazgovarate sa postavljačem šablona (osim ako ovaj korisnik više nije aktivan na Vikipediji). U svakom slučaju, ako se pitanje čini spornim, tražite konsenzus na stranici za razgovor;
4. Kada postoji konsenzus na stranici (ili negde drugde) o rešavanju označenog problema. Preporučljivo je da se označi stranica konsenzusa u opisu izmene zajedno sa vezom koja vodi do vaše izmene;
5. Kada se s razlogom može zaključiti da šablon više nije relevantan, kao što je {tlx|{Current}} obrazac koji se pojavljuje u članku koji više ne dokumentuje trenutni događaj;
6. Kada šablon za održavanje zahteva podršku, ali nije u potpunosti podržan. Na primer: Šabloni koji se odnose na neutralnost kao što su: sukob interesa,označen {{COI}} i Neutralna tačka gledišta, označen{{POV}}, toplo se preporučuje da osoba koja je postavila oznaku ostavi komentar na stranici za razgovor kako bi potpunila razlog šablona. Ako osoba koja je ostavila taj šablon to i ne uradi, ili je razgovor uspavan, šablon može biti uklonjen.
7. Ako ne postoji konsenzus o uklanjanju starih i održavajućih šablona, sem {{POV}} šablona objašnjenih iznad. U vezi s tim, neki šabloni se odnose na stvari koje su binarne ili nemaju smisla- korišćenje šablona za održavanje je jako preporučljivo napisanih prema pravilima i smernicama Vikipedije, i ostaje dok se problem ne reši (na primer: nedostatak citata). Kao i sa neutralnom tačkom gledišta, samo godine mogu biti relativne ako se radi o nedostatku promena ili razgovora koji može biti protumačen kao „tihi konsenzus”, koji se ne isplati popravljati. To neizbežno uključuje osudu i subjektivne elemente.
8. I na kraju, postoje slučajevi kada osoba koja stavlja šablon za održavanje, koja označava neku osnovnu stvar, otkriva da problem u stvari ne može da se reši. Na primer, ako je članak označen kao da mu nedostaju citati pouzdanih ili sekundarnih izvora, koje su napisale treće strane, a korisnik koji vidi šablon za održavanje otkriva da takvi izvori izgleda ne postoje, to obično znači da članak treba izbrisati. U takvim slučajevima nije toliko bitno da šablon ne pripada članku i da ga treba ukloniti, već da označavanje stranice radi održavanja nikada neće odgovoriti na ono kritičnije pitanje da sama stranica uopšte ne pripada Vikipediji.

Kada ostaviti

Ne treba uklanjati šablone za održavanje ukoliko je ispunjeno bilo koje od sledećih:

1. Problem još uvek nije razrešen;
2. Postoji aktivnost u toku ili diskusija vezana za problem oko šablona (sa izuzetkom Šablon:Neutralnost);
3. Ne razumete problematiku koju naznačava šablon;
4. Plaćeni ste da uređujete članak ili imate drugi konflikt interesa.

Uklanjanje

Da li ste pažljivo iščitali stranice za pomoć i temeljno razrešili problem? Ili ste doneli sračunatu odluku da šablon nije, ili nije više, primenjiv? Odlično! Sada, da biste uklonili šablon:

1. Kliknite bilo na "Uredi" ili "Uredi izvor" na vrhu stranice, ili ako šablon za održavanje nije na vrhu stranice već negde unutar članka, možete koristiti i section edit link;
2. Ako uređujete vikitekst („izvorno“ uređivanje): Izbrišite kod šablona.Kod koji vidite u ovom članku za uređivanje biće u sledećoj formi: {{Name of template|date=Month Year}}. Ako koristite vizuelno uređivanje, kliknite na šablon koji će postati plav. Pritisnite na „Izbriši” dugme koje će se pojaviti na samom šablonu;
3. Ostavite opisni sažetak za uređivanje, npr. „Uklonjeno [ ubacite naziv šablona ] jer sam rešio problem;“
4. Kliknite Objavi izmene.

To je to. Hvala!

Promena šablona

Problemi naznačeni nekim šablonom mogu implicirati sekundarne probleme koji će još uvek postojati nakon što razrešite glavni problem. U takvim slučajevima, može biti prikladnije da promenite šablon nakon Vaše izmene nego da ga samo uklonite. Obrazloženje za promenu šablona treba obrazložiti u rezimeu promena na dnu stranice.

Na primer: na jednom članku se nalazi šablon {{bez izvora}}. Ovaj šablon se postavlja na stranice bez reference. Prema tome, dodavanje samo jedne odgovarajuće reference čini da šablon više nije važeći. Međutim, ta promena ne dovodi do dovoljnog snabdevanja članka. U ovom primeru, promena drugog šablona može biti pogodnija, u zavisnosti od vrste, kvaliteta i načina problema.Postoje šabloni koji bi mogli biti pogodniji i koji se mogu naći na stranci šablona i obaveštenja.

Suprotno tome, neki šabloni označavaju izrazito diskretne probleme pri kojima ne treba razmotriti prelazak na drugi šablon. Na primer, ako je članak „ siroče “ - što znači da nema nijednu viki vezu koja bi odvela do nekog drugog članka, dodavanjem viki veza može rešiti problem i uklanjanje oznake je nedvosmisleno; Ako je šablon postavljen na jednom delu članka, tamo de su diskretne sekcije, problem može biti rešen postavkom šablona ili [[|Šablon:Inline cleanup tags|postavljanjem oznaka za čišćenje]], ako takva verzija šablona postoji; U nekim slučajevima, može biti od pomoći da zatražite zahtev za uklanjanje šablona za održavanje sa urednikom koji je inicijalno dodao isti u sporni članak.

Specifične smernice šablona

Ovaj paragraf služi kao vodič za pitanje kako pristupiti nekim od uobičajenih šablona, koji su vas i mogli dovesti na ovu stranicu. Detaljnije informacije o šablonima mogu biti pronađene pristupanjem na linkove samih šablona.

Kliknite "prikaži" sa desne strane, da biste prikazali instrukcije.

{{multiple issues}} 

Neki članci će biti označeni šablonom : {{multiple issues}} za više diskretnih problema. Ako uklonite jedan ili više problema ali ne sve, nemojte uklanjati ovaj šablon. Uklonite samo parametre šablona koje ste rešili. U primeru ispod možete videti različite parametre šablona.

{{Multiple issues|
{{Orphan|date=January 2008}}
{{POV|date=June 2009}}
{{One source|date=March 2011}}
}}

Ako na primer uklonite problem Orphan (siroče) ali i ne dva ostala, uklonite samo parametar siroče a ostala dva ostavite. Šablon će ostati istog karaktera ali sa manjim problemom.

{{Multiple issues|
{{POV|date=June 2009}}
{{One source|date=March 2011}}
}}

Pogledajte sledeće sekcije koje predstavljaju druge vrste šablona.

{{unreferenced}} 

Sva Vikipedijina pravila i smernice imaju zajednički denominator za pouzdani izvor. Na primer, sadržaj Vikipedije mora biti proverljiv sa pouzdanim izvorima; prepoznatljiv sa pouzdanim izvorima koji su povezani sa tekstom i koji obrađuju detaljno temu članka; i kako bi se utvrdilo da članak nije sačinjen izvornim istraživanjima, citirani izvori moraju podržati dostavljeni materijal bez analize i donošenja zaknjučaka koji nije naveden u izvoru.

{{unreferenced}}, obično predstavljen kodom {{Unreferenced|date=april 2024}}, koji se kodira {{Unsourced}}, {{Unverified}}, {{No references}}, {{No sources}}, i {{Unref}}, i koji se prikazuje u članku ovako:

Označava problem članka koji nema nijednu referencu. Ovaj šablon se više ne primenjuje člancima koji sadrže jednu referencu bilo da su na dnu stranice ili direktno pored teksta.

Kako bi popravili problem, dodajte pouzdane reference. Zbog njihovih važnosti, Vikipedija sadrži brojne instrukcije i stranice o pravilnom postavljanju referenci. Preporučujemo Vam Help:Referencing for beginners i Help:Introduction to referencing/1 i na kraju možete pogledati Vikipedija:Navođenje izvora. Ova pomoć se može naći na bilo kojoj stranici za uređivanje .

Vizuelni priručnik za citiranje 

Formatting references using inline citations

Sve informacije na Vikipediji moraju biti proverene. Naša najbolja metoda provere je identifikovanje pouzdanih izvora. Naša metoda citiranja je "cite.php" korišćenjem <ref></ref> elementa. Korišćenjem ove metode,svaki put kada je potrebno proveriti referencu, ako postoji ona će biti označena malim brojem. Klikom na taj broj stići ćete direktno na dnu stranice sa identifikacijom željene reference. In brief, anywhere you want a footnote to appear in a piece of text, you place an opening <ref> tag followed by the text of the citation which you want to appear at the bottom of the article, and close with a </ref> tag. Note the closing slash ("/"). For multiple use of a single reference, the opening ref tag is given a name, like so: <ref name="name"> followed by the citation text and a closing </ref> tag. Each time you want to use that footnote again, you simply use the first element with a slash, like so: <ref name="name" />. In order for these references to appear, you must tell the software where to display them, using either the code <references/> or, most commonly, the template, {{Reflist}} which can be modified to display the references in columns using {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}. Per our style guidelines, the references should be displayed in a separate section denominated "References" located after the body of the article.
Inline citation code; what you type in 'edit mode'	What it produces when you save
Two separate citations.<ref>Citation text.</ref><ref>Citation text2.</ref> Multiple<ref name="multiple">Citation text3.</ref>citation<ref name="multiple" /> use.<ref name="multiple" /> == References == {{Reflist}}	Two separate citations. Multiple citation use. References_________________
Templates that can be used between <ref></ref> tags to format references {{Citation}} • {{Cite web}} • {{Cite book}} • {{Cite news}} • {{Cite journal}} • Others • Examples

Šablon:Z3

As noted higher on this page, unless you thoroughly source a page in response to this template, it may more appropriate to switch this template with a more specific one rather than simply removing it. Depending on the type, quality, depth and manner of sourcing added to fix the issue, you might replace it with {{refimprove}}, {{no footnotes}}, {{primary sources}} or a host of others listed at Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles.

{{refimprove}} 

All of Wikipedia's core content policies and guidelines have as a common denominator the need for reliable sourcing. For example, the content of Wikipedia articles must be verifiable in reliable sources; the notability of a topic demonstrated through such reliable sources that are secondary in nature, which are independent of the topic and treat the subject in substantive detail (not just "mere mentions"); and in order to establish that the content is not original research, the sources cited must directly support the material being presented without analysis or synthesis to reach or imply a conclusion that is not stated in the sources.

{{refimprove}}, typically placed by the code {{Refimprove|date=april 2024}}, having redirects such as {{Improve references}}, {{Verify}}, {{More sources}} and {{Citations needed}}, and displaying when reading as:

flags the issue of an article that has some, but insufficient inline citations to support the material currently in the article. It should not be used for articles with no sources at all ({{unreferenced}} should be used instead), nor for articles without inline citations but which contain some sources ({{no footnotes}} should be used instead), nor for article on living persons ({{BLP sources}} should be used instead). This template no longer applies once an article has been made fairly well sourced.

To address the issue, add additional inline citations to reliable sources for all significant statements in the article. Whether or not an article has been rendered "fairly well sourced" may involve a judgement call, but in any event, the sources used must be reliable ones, and articles should not rely predominantly on primary sources, but rather on secondary sources. Note the minimum: all quotations, material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, and contentious material, whether negative, positive, or neutral, about living persons, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material.

{{no footnotes}} 

All of Wikipedia's core content policies and guidelines have as a common denominator the need for reliable sourcing. For example, the content of Wikipedia articles must be verifiable in reliable sources; the notability of a topic demonstrated through such reliable sources that are secondary in nature, which are independent of the topic and treat the subject in substantive detail (not just "mere mentions"); and in order to establish that the content is not original research, the sources cited must directly support the material being presented without analysis or synthesis to reach or imply a conclusion that is not stated in the sources.

{{no footnotes}}, typically placed by the code {{No footnotes|date=april 2024}}, and having redirects such as {{Citations}}, {{No citations}}, {{Inline citations}} and {{No inline citations}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:No footnotes flags the issue of an article that contains some form of sourcing but lacks the precision of inline citations to associate given portions of material with specific reliable source(s) that support that material. Inline citations make verifiability accessible. In short, in the absence of an inline citation that associates specific material to a specific source, it becomes very difficult for a reader to check what sources, given in only some general manner, verify what items of content.

To address the issue, add inline citations to reliable sources, ideally for all significant statements in the article. Note that at a minimum: all quotations, material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, and contentious material, whether negative, positive, or neutral, about living persons, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material.

There are many instruction pages that directly and indirectly give guidance on adding inline citations. We suggest starting with Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1, and then seeing Wikipedia:Citing sources for a more involved treatment, noting that each contains see also sections linking to additional help pages, guides and tutorials. A visual guide to placing inline citations through <ref> ... </ref> tags may also help, and appears below.

Visual inline citation guide 

Formatting references using inline citations

All information in Wikipedia articles should be verified by citations to reliable sources. Our preferred method of citation is using the "cite.php" form of inline citations, using the <ref></ref> elements. Using this method, each time a particular source is mined for information (don't copy word-for-word!), a footnote is placed in the text ("inline"), that takes one to the detail of the source when clicked, set forth in a references section after the text of the article. In brief, anywhere you want a footnote to appear in a piece of text, you place an opening <ref> tag followed by the text of the citation which you want to appear at the bottom of the article, and close with a </ref> tag. Note the closing slash ("/"). For multiple use of a single reference, the opening ref tag is given a name, like so: <ref name="name"> followed by the citation text and a closing </ref> tag. Each time you want to use that footnote again, you simply use the first element with a slash, like so: <ref name="name" />. In order for these references to appear, you must tell the software where to display them, using either the code <references/> or, most commonly, the template, {{Reflist}} which can be modified to display the references in columns using {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}. Per our style guidelines, the references should be displayed in a separate section denominated "References" located after the body of the article.
Inline citation code; what you type in 'edit mode'	What it produces when you save
Two separate citations.<ref>Citation text.</ref><ref>Citation text2.</ref> Multiple<ref name="multiple">Citation text3.</ref>citation<ref name="multiple" /> use.<ref name="multiple" /> == References == {{Reflist}}	Two separate citations. Multiple citation use. References_________________
Templates that can be used between <ref></ref> tags to format references {{Citation}} • {{Cite web}} • {{Cite book}} • {{Cite news}} • {{Cite journal}} • Others • Examples

Šablon:Z3

{{primary sources}} 

{{primary sources}}, typically placed by the code {{Primary sources|date=april 2024}}, having among other redirects {{Primary}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Primary sources flags the issue of an article that too heavily relies on primary sources – original materials that are close to an event; often accounts written by people who are directly involved – as opposed to secondary, and to some extent, tertiary sources. Primary sources have their place but they must be used carefully and are easy to misuse. Typically, they should only be used for straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. They should not be used to support content that presents interpretation, analysis, evaluation, or synthesis, and should not be the predominant form of sourcing in an article. Moreover, primary sources are generally not useful to demonstrate a topic's notability.

To address the issue, add citations predominantly to secondary sources. Often this involves replacing some of the primary sources with secondary sources, and not just adding them alongside existing ones—especially where the primary source is being used for an invalid purpose such as interpretive claims and synthesis.

Finding secondary sources is a large topic but make use of Google Books, News and Scholar; find local newspaper archives; go to a library; if you have access, use pay/subscription services like JSTOR, Newspaperarchive.com; Ancestry.com, etc.; see our guide on free English newspaper sources and others listed here; request access to pay/prescription sources at WP:RX. If insufficient reliable secondary and independent sources exist treating a topic in substantive detail, then Wikipedia should not have an article on the topic. Remember that no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability.

{{notability}} 

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a specific type of reference work properly containing articles on topics of knowledge. Wikipedia employs the concept of notability to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics by attempting to ensure that the subjects of articles are "worthy of notice" – by only including articles on topics that the world has taken note of by substantively treating them in reliable sources unconnected with the topic.

The general notability standard thus presumes that topics are notable if they have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

{{notability}}, typically placed by the code {{Notability|date=april 2024}}, having redirects such as {{Notable}}, {{Non-notable}}, {{Nn}} and {{Significance}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Notability (or some variation linking to one of the subject-specific notability guidelines) questions whether a topic is notable. As stated in the template, addressing the issue requires adding citations to reliable secondary sources. There are a number of common mistakes seen in addressing this issue:

• Adding citations but to unreliable sources: We are looking for treatment in sources like mainstream newspaper articles, non-vanity books, magazines, scholarly journals, television and radio documentaries, etc. – sources with editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means generally not random personal websites, blogs, forum posts, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, self-published sources like open wikis (including other Wikipedia articles), etc. In short, read and understand Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources.
• Adding citations to connected (non-independent) sources: While primary sources may be useful to verify certain facts, they must be used with caution and do nothing to establish notability. In short, we are looking for secondary sources written by third parties to a topic.
• Adding citations to sources that merely mention the topic: You can cite numerous reliable, secondary, independent sources and it will not help establish notability if they do not treat the topic substantively – think generally two paragraphs of text focused on the topic at issue. Remember: it is much better to cite two good sources that treat a topic in detail, than twenty that just mention it in passing. Moreover, citation overkill to sources containing mere passing mentions of the topic is a badge of a non-notable topic and, if good sources are actually present in the mix, they will be hidden among these others from those seeking to assess a topic's demonstration of notability.

If insufficient reliable secondary and independent sources exist treating a topic in substantive detail, then Wikipedia should not have an article on the topic. Remember that no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability.

{{advert}} 

{{advert}}, typically placed by the code {{Advert|date=april 2024}}, and having redirects such as {{Advertisement}}, {{Advertising}}, {{Ad}} and {{Puff}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Advert flags the issue of an article that reads like an advertisement. For example, such articles may tell users to buy a company's product, provide price lists, give links to online sellers, use unencyclopedic or meaningless buzzwords, be filled with peacock language and read like the website of the article's topic or a press release touting its virtues, rather than that of a neutrally-written encyclopedia article about the topic.

Advertisements are by no means limited to commercial topics and indeed are often seen for all manner of others, such as "noble causes", religious/spiritual leaders, sports teams, gaming clans and so forth. Though not always the case, a common denominator in promotional articles is the creator having some personal involvement with the topic. Please note the existence of {{Uw-paid1}} and higher levels if the creator appears to be financially compensated for their writings here. Note that pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic may be tagged for speedy deletion under section G11 of the criteria using {{db-g11}} or {{db-spam}}.

To address the issue, rewrite the article from a neutral point of view – which is not just about the wording and tone but also as to what the article covers and what it does not cover. Wikipedia articles should represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. Removing all promotional language is a good start but depending on what is left, may only be a surface treatment. See what you can salvage but often there is little alternative but to strip out all content that is not reliably sourced, leaving it in a stub state. The ideal, of course, is to explore the existence of sourcing for the topic and build from the ground up.

{{POV}} 

{{POV}}, typically placed by the code {{POV|date=april 2024}}, and having redirects such as {{NPOV}}, {{POV dispute}}, {{Neutrality}}, {{Neutral}} and {{Not neutral}}, and displaying when reading as:

flags the issue of an article that has been identified as having a serious issue of balance, the lack of a neutral point of view, and the tagger wishes to attract editors with different viewpoints to the article. An unbalanced or non-neutral article is one that does not fairly represent the balance of perspectives of high-quality, reliable secondary sources. This tag is meant to be accompanied by an explanation on the article's talk page about why it was added, identifying specific issues that are actionable within Wikipedia's content policies.

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. You may remove this template whenever any one of the following is true:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved;
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given;
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

{{lead missing}} 

{{lead missing}}, typically placed by the code {{Lead missing|date=april 2024}}, and having redirects such as {{No lead}}, {{Nointro}}, {{No lead section}}, {{Lead absent}} and {{Intro needed}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Lead missing flags the issue of an article that fails to follow Wikipedia's standard article layout guidelines by introducing the reader to the topic in a lead section containing a summary of the most important article contents. The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. A good lead section cultivates the reader's interest in reading more of the article, but not by teasing the reader or hinting at content that follows. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies.

To address the issue, write a lead section. The size of an appropriate lead will depend on the breadth of the article but it should be no more than four well-composed paragraphs, and should generally not contain content that is not already present in the body of the article.

{{current}} 

{{current}}, typically placed by the code {{Current|date=april 2024}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Current (or a subject-specific variation listed on Wikipedia:Current event templates) warns editors and readers about an article that is the subject of a current event, such as a breaking news story, that is accordingly experiencing a great flux of edits and is in a fast-changing state. Wikipedia attracts numerous editors who want to update articles in real time immediately after such current events are published. However, sources to breaking news reports often contain serious inaccuracies, and so these templates can also draw attention to the need to add improved sources as soon as they become available.

Šablon bi generalno govoreći trebalo uklanjati kada opisani događaj više nije predmet velike pažnje urednika. It is not meant to be a general disclaimer indicating that an article's contents may not be accurate, or to mark an article that merely has recent news articles about the topic (if it were, hundreds of thousands of articles would have the {{Current}} template, with no informational consequence). If the article continues to have sourcing or cleanup issues, a more appropriate maintenance template should be used instead.

{{linkrot}} 

{{linkrot}}, typically placed by the code {{linkrot|date=april 2024}}, and displaying when reading as: Šablon:Linkrot Šablon:Expand-section

Istraživanje označenog problema

Kao što je prethodno naznačeno, većina šablona zadrži poveznice ka links to guidance pages. Additionally, many templates have documentation that provides more information about the template's flagged issue, which is displayed when you visit the template page itself.

To access the template and thereby see its documentation, type into the search field Template:, followed by the name of the template, seen when you view its placement in the Edit interface (typically found in the first lines of the article). The first "parameter" is the name of the template.

For example, if you found this in the Edit interface, {{Unreferenced|date=april 2024}}, then you would visit the template itself by searching for Template:Unreferenced. The accompanying documentation for all maintenance templates, if it exists, can be located in this way.

Potrebna vam je pomoć?

Pročitali ste ovu stranicu ali ste i dalje zbunjeni šta treba da se uradi povodom problema na stranici i kako skloniti šablon za održavanje? Probajte da potražite pomoć na Trgu, stranici namenjenoj za postavljanje pitanja. Alternativno, možete potražiti pomoć na našem Diskord serveru.