Category talk:Pages needing expert attention

The reasons for and against the use of this template should be clearly stated. If a page is in "need of an expert", is it because of ..

the need of an expert opinion in an encyclopedia where opinions are discouraged,
incoherent content that needs to be represented in a way agreeable to experts in the field,
the need to define the topic so as to set guidelines for further editing,
accuracy dispute or similar (if so, why is the relevant template not used?) ..

..or why? Santtus 14:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page doesn't mention if the tag should go at the top of the page or the bottom. I've seen both; I think the top is more appropriate. Шизомби 14:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Split

This category has grown large enough that it may be worth splitting. As someone who can claim some expertise in a few areas, I'd be willing to go through a list of articles in those areas and see if I can provide assistance. However it's pretty hard to find the ones in my areas of expertise from a huge list of every article in any field that needs expert attention. --Delirium 20:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur as well. I came onto the talk page to make exactly that point. It gets exasperating searching for articles one can help on. Even just splitting them into 8 or 10 "big" categories would massively reduce the amount of searching. However, sorting through these old ones and categorising them would be a pain. Legis 13:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to split it too. I would like to help in some articles, but I won't go through the whole list to find one. Topics-related subcategories would be needed. NCurse _work 16:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kay, folks. I very much concur. There's already a medicine related one. This task is pretty much similar to stub-sorting, yeah? I'm going to take a quick look at how the stubs are sorted and then I'll try and apply a similar method over here. I'm on it! --Brad Beattie ^(talk) 13:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a project devoted to this! Wikipedia:WikiProject Expert Request Sorting. --Brad Beattie ^(talk) 13:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this tag being used appropriately

I looked at some items in this category and found some of them were also tagged with (or could be tagged with) {{sources}}. There is no way you can claim you need expert when the article is not even sourced! Actually sourcing the article will probably clear up most problems. I would like to suggest that a bot go through and remove the expert tag from all articles also tagged with {{sources}}. Then we can go through what is left and replace the expert tag with {{sources}} for any other articles lacking sources. If that is done I think the category will be more managable.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 18:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly there are cases where we don't need to have the expert tag. In those cases, by all means remove it. I'd advise against making {{sources}} and {{expert}} mutually exclusive though, as occassionally there are sources needed, but the article also needs the eye of an expert. --Brad Beattie ^(talk) 12:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]