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)[reply]

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)[reply]

RfC of potential interest

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)[reply]