Redirect to:
placed between the TOC and the first heading. Shortcuts MOS:LEADCITEMOS:LEADCITE MOS:CITELEADMOS:CITELEAD The lead section must conform to verifiability...
Click to read more »Delist per above and more Citations in the lead are unecessary per WP:LEADCITE Incosistency: "100 percent" and "100%". Several paragraphs lack citations...
Click to read more »but WP:LEADCITE and WP:COATRACK is yet another minor issue that needs to be cleaned up. -- 109.76.132.191 (talk) 17:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC) LEADCITE allows...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). Be aware that the A-Class review will include a source review focussed...
Click to read more »a better product. –Fredddie™ 03:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC) Lead Per WP:LEADCITE, unless there are contentious facts, don't cite anything in the lead. Since...
Click to read more »(32 kB)), the article should have a lead that is ~3 paragraphs long. MOS:LEADCITE also states that citations aren't necessary in the lead if the information...
Click to read more »questionable sources, the lead also needs to be rid of most or not all of its citations per WP:LEADCITE.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)...
Click to read more »present in the lead but not in the body, also doubling as a violation of WP:LEADCITE "History" section is woefully short even with the subpage. "Degrees" and...
Click to read more »for some reason; definitely too many There a substantial amount of WP:LEADCITE, and the lead in general seems far too short, especially when compared...
Click to read more »WP:NFCC. The first image is plenty to demonstrate the game's elements. WP:LEADCITE states that anything in the lead that's in the body needn't be sourced...
Click to read more »AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC) Fails the GA criteria 1 for MOS:LEADCITE violations, 2 for most of the sources are primary ones and most of them...
Click to read more »supposed to summarize the article. Try to reduce citations on the lead per WP:LEADCITE He is currently Dedman Family → He is currently a Dedman Family and Professor...
Click to read more »are cited in the article, they don't need to be cited in the lead per WP:LEADCITE. If they are not in the article body, they should probably be added to...
Click to read more »Most, if not all, of the citations in the lede should be removed per WP:LEADCITE. Those are the most glaring big picture issues I see. ~ HAL333 21:34, 25...
Click to read more »sequel, though it's mentioned in the lede with a citation, violating WP:LEADCITE. Development: "That same month, Katzenberg held a meeting with the Feature...
Click to read more »There is a references section, you just need to scroll down Actually, MOS:LEADCITE says information doesn't have to be given an inline reference if it is...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused...
Click to read more »uncited (unless there is a contentious fact that needs it). Please see WP:LEADCITE for further informattion. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)...
Click to read more »prejudice to renomination. Nominator does not appear to be familiar with MOS:LEADCITE. If the lead is not a summary of the referenced content in the body, or...
Click to read more »serious issues with sources. For formatting, the article does not follow MOS:LEADCITE and WP:INFOBOXCITE. There's a bare url (ref 101), and much of the "Notable...
Click to read more »in the lead are probably better off being moved to the body as per WP:LEADCITE. Anyway, I have a peer review of my own open and would appreciate any comments...
Click to read more »reliable sources. Try running InternetArchiveBot on the article. Per MOS:LEADCITE, citations should not be in the lead as it summarizes the article. Davest3r08...
Click to read more »first few sections: Dead link Quite a few citations in the lead - see WP:LEADCITE Quite a few harverrors in references - you might find User:Ucucha/HarvErrors...
Click to read more »MOS:TM. This should also be reflected in the text where necessary. Per MOS:LEADCITE, references are not typically included in the lead if they are also cited...
Click to read more »per WP:LEADCITE additional references in the lead are not necessary. Harrias talk 10:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC) I would argue that WP:LEADCITE doesn't...
Click to read more »FC and Qwest Field peer reviews that seem to apply here as well: Per WP:LEADCITE the lead section should not require footnoted references since it should...
Click to read more »years, I feel that citing fifteen refs on one fact to be overkill per WP:LEADCITE and visually unappealing/distracting per WP:FL?'s Cr.6. Comments are welcome...
Click to read more »fear propaganda refers to specifically Done Added more to it. Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead generally doesn't contain references, as they should all be in...
Click to read more »infobox should be moved into the body of the article (MOS:INFOBOXCITE, MOS:LEADCITE) It doesn't look like there are any citations at all for the Performances...
Click to read more »later it should then be repeated in main. This has been under debate. WP:LEADCITE gives (what I find to be) a vague explanation to proceed, and there have...
Click to read more »Wikipelli Talk 17:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC) Direct quote must be cited per WP:LEADCITE Not sure soul needs to be linked. Fixed Unlinked Wikipelli Talk 17:35,...
Click to read more »to be cited there, or else needs to be included in the body as well (WP:LEADCITE.) In terms of what's useful or appropriate for a general-purpose encyclopedia...
Click to read more »caption should be attributed, and quotes in the lead should be cited per WP:LEADCITE Done. Sorry, what I was actually suggesting for the lead caption was in-text...
Click to read more »improvement: In general, the lead should not contain citations as per MOS:LEADCITE. In the case of this article, the material in the lead is not repeated...
Click to read more »since there isn't anything present that's likely to be challenged. MOS:LEADCITE is a good reference for drafting a page intro. Thoughtful and contextually...
Click to read more »believe this page follows nearly all MOSs I know of, though I'm aware MOS:LEADCITE is an exception to that currently - I'm still mulling over a graceful way...
Click to read more »the infobox is part of the lead section, you may want to comply with WP:LEADCITE. You must mention how the film was a turning point in his later political...
Click to read more »linking to this Peer Review and asking for additional comments. Per WP:LEADCITE, all info in lede should be already cited to in-line cites, below later...
Click to read more »pattern of disruption, including removal of sourced info in violation of WP:LEADCITE [1], and again at [2], and addition of unsourced and poorly sourced info...
Click to read more »be general. Please let me know if you disagree with any of them. Per WP:LEADCITE, citations should not be used in the lead unless you are citing controversial...
Click to read more »2013 (UTC) Notes from Teancum (talk) 17:51, 3 August 2013 (UTC) Per WP:LEADCITE citations shouldn't be in the lead if the info exists in the body. WP:LEAD...
Click to read more »need to add other sections too. Do not place citations on the lead per WP:LEADCITE "Conceptualizing organizations as existing in networks within organizational...
Click to read more »first sentence is too long and should end after "state of Kerala". Per WP:LEADCITE, those citations ought to be in the body of the article, but not the lead...
Click to read more »review this. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:54, 30 March 2026 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE: Avoid citations on the lead if they are already referenced in the body...
Click to read more »This directly contradicts what was said in the GA review it received; WP:LEADCITE basically says that only really contentious stuff needs citing in the lead;...
Click to read more »article to GA or FA. Also I believe section name is kinda long for me Per WP:LEADCITE, citiations in lead section are usually not welcome. The section name,...
Click to read more »lead per MOS:LEADCITE, as long as the content is cited in the article body", but the named guideline says the opposite. Specifically, LEADCITE says that...
Click to read more »references on one sentence in the lead is not necessary I would say. MOS:LEADCITE suggests references in the lead tend not to be needed, since the lead should...
Click to read more »re-write in order to meet the "well written" part of the criteria. Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead doesn't need to be sourced and would be better off being merged...
Click to read more »Scottdoesntknow (talk) 02:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC) Yikes! Please see WP:LEADCITE—citations in the lead are discouraged except in special cases. The density...
Click to read more »infobox. I couldn't find anything about the downloadable version. Also, WP:LEADCITE states generally that unless there is a need to have citations in the lead...
Click to read more »(MOS:LEAD); "the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body" (MOS:LEADCITE). Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC) I didn't mean...
Click to read more »(Talk) 23:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC) I think Kailash was referring to WP:LEADCITE, which indicates that citations are generally not used in lead sections...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused...
Click to read more »make a great naive reviewer but a useless expert. What the hey. Per WP:LEADCITE, the only things you really need to cite in the lead are assertions which...
Click to read more »WP:LEADCITE specifies the opposite regarding the references. As far as level of detail is concerned, I'll try to squeeze something out yet. LEADCITE says...
Click to read more »good. Notes Per WP:OVERLINK and the Infobox film documentation Per WP:LEADCITE Per WP:COPYPASTE IMDb page under Production notes See WP:CASTLIST Per WP:V...
Click to read more »preference, the lead may or may not need to include references (see WP:LEADCITE). This section is often the hardest to fill out, as it typically relies...
Click to read more »immaterial to this review.) Here are some issues: There are too many LEADCITEs, much in common with other late-2000s FA promotions; they are not forbidden...
Click to read more »🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:17, 20 March 2026 (UTC) First, please see WP:LEADCITE, do not place citations on the lead (the first part and introduction to...
Click to read more »Epicgenius (talk) 13:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Driveby, unsourced statements, MOS:LEADCITE issues, and the article is 14.9k words long, which while technically below...
Click to read more »in the lead should be removed/moved to the body of the article per MOS:LEADCITE. Hope to see this article eventually reach FAC. Good luck! -- ZooBlazer...
Click to read more »criterion 2B states that reliable sources should be cited inline, but the MOS:LEADCITE policy states (2nd paragraph): "Because the lead will usually repeat information...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused...
Click to read more »the second paragraph in the Gameplay section is unsourced Fixed Per WP:LEADCITE if information is found elsewhere in the article, it should not be cited...
Click to read more »comprehensive, you need a more thorough survey of the literature. Lead: MOS:LEADCITE would expect cites only for the direct quotes. "Deemed "one of cinema's...
Click to read more »forgetting. Some of the [citation needed] tags were in violation of WP:LEADCITE, but I did find a decent amount of uncited content elsewhere in the article...
Click to read more »per WP:LEADCITE additional references in the lead are not necessary. Harrias talk 10:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC) I would argue that WP:LEADCITE doesn't...
Click to read more »a second PR archive as needed. Don't put citations in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. Bishan station (then named Kampung San Teng) and at a Chinese cemetery...
Click to read more »awards, etc. written in there. These should all have references. Per WP:LEADCITE if they are referenced later in the article they do not need sourced in...
Click to read more »first sentence, but right now you say U.S. before United States. Per WP:LEADCITE, the Michael J. Pauley quotes needs an in-line citation. Rationalobserver...
Click to read more »on 2023 February 11. Izno (talk) 02:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC) Template:Leadcite_comment (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) The above discussion...
Click to read more »opens? Generally there shouldn't need to be citations in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. History The planning → construction → expansion structure works well,...
Click to read more »page, good job there. Not sure citations are needed in the lede, per WP:LEADCITE, those could all probably be removed, with a check to make sure same info...
Click to read more »You have citations in the lead. Lead is generally to be uncited per MOS:LEADCITE Several sources are missing author names Need a thorough copy-edit, I do...
Click to read more »look to you as it currently stands? Note that per my understanding of MOS:LEADCITE, few if any citations are required in the lead section, as it summarizes...
Click to read more »lead requires no citations, but quoted material must be attributed per WP:LEADCITE: "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and direct quotations...
Click to read more »to be) in the article, it is not necessary to cite here (expecting WP:LEADCITE. The cast section should be like this. The infobox includes Japan release...
Click to read more »12:13, 25 March 2026 (UTC) Try to remove most citations in the lead per WP:LEADCITE Is there nothing about his early life? "stealing data from executives,...
Click to read more »elsewhere in the article text and are unlikely to be challenged (see WP:LEADCITE). It is usual to list all known aircraft type applications from reliable...
Click to read more »the citations in the main body and have none at all in the lead. See WP:LEADCITE. However, the policy section ought to be cited, and may be cut if this...
Click to read more »a road" – quotations in the lead should have inline citations per MOS:LEADCITE (or rephrase into your own words) Guadeloupe – the first mention (in Preparations)...
Click to read more »underneath. UndercoverClassicist T·C 19:25, 15 November 2023 (UTC) MOS:LEADCITE: in general, it shouldn't be necessary to cite things in the lead, since...
Click to read more »Cs32en Talk to me 01:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC) That's not accurate, read WP:LEADCITE. Information in the lead that is not general and is likely to be challenged...
Click to read more »Internet Archive with WP:CIT fields archivedate and archiveurl. Per WP:LEADCITE, info presently cited in lede is non-controversial and not-contentious...
Click to read more »possible, could this be sourced? Unless you think it's unnecessary per WP:LEADCITE, I would cite them. I can't find any source that states this explicitly...
Click to read more »appears to be a lede-style summary of the subsections afterward (a la WP:LEADCITE), with the relevant citations in the respective subsections. If truly desired...
Click to read more »Specific minor issues WP:MOS asks that citations are kept out of the lead MOS:LEADCITE Pragraphs should not be so short. A few sentences or more is normal. Sometimes...
Click to read more »the lead general so that citations in it would not be necessary, per WP:LEADCITE. All information in the lead section is now cited in other sections of...
Click to read more »seem like the info isn't summarised in the body of the article. per WP:LEADCITE cites don't need to be in the lead unless for controversial info or quotes...
Click to read more »not (as one example). Thank you. Mmm, yes well I've tried to follow WP:LEADCITE on this one. Everybody seems to have a different opinion on the matter...
Click to read more »Hope these help. Smurrayinchester 09:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC) Lead Per WP:LEADCITE, these citations ought to be in the article, but not the lead. has been...
Click to read more »the number of citations in the lead section is rather large, see MOS:LEADCITE and maybe think about moving some of those citations, especially because...
Click to read more »review - spotchecks not done Why so many citations in the lead? See WP:LEADCITE Fixed number of columns is deprecated in {{reflist}} in favour of column...
Click to read more »philly_boy92 The lead of an article should generally avoid citations, per WP:LEADCITE. It is assumed that the contents of the lead are a summary of the contents...
Click to read more »are my concerns: The lead contains refs which is unnecessary as per WP:LEADCITE if the information is cited in the body, which it is. Common terms and...
Click to read more »problem, so I will try to find another replacement for that. According to WP:LEADCITE, we don't specifically need citations in the lead if the statements are...
Click to read more »a line 18:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC) I am not seeing your point at WP:LEADCITE in terms a policy that citations clutter leads. Thanks for the weasel pointer...
Click to read more »Internet Archive. Recommend archiving all links in article this way. Per WP:LEADCITE, all info in lede should be already cited to in-line cites, below later...
Click to read more »2019 GAR. There are citations in the lead, which should be removed per WP:LEADCITE. (Fixed. Y) The final paragraph of Elevator video is an WP:MNA and reads...
Click to read more »and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 03:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE issues - several references in the lead either need to be removed/moved...
Click to read more »09:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC) All the paragraphs are sourced. Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead does not require citations. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:27, 30 September...
Click to read more »Wikipedia meme of keeping references out of the lead (as explained in WP:LEADCITE, part of the Manual of Style. A problem that affects regular medical editors...
Click to read more »April 2011 (UTC) The intro shouldn't have a lot of references, per WP:LEADCITE, it would just be repeating the same citation. The intro is a summary of...
Click to read more »I removed a few links per WP:OL and moved some refs in the lead per WP:LEADCITE. One issue I found with your article was the similar wording throughout...
Click to read more »IDLI apply, also in addressing LEADCITE. I did find some problems (some kindly addressed), For example: MOS:LEADCITE is pretty much required for FAs...
Click to read more »lead and into "Classification" where the information is repeated per MOS:LEADCITE Ref 2 is citing the sentence it's attached to, not the count of species...
Click to read more »seems like there should be a "$" somewhere in "USD 1 billion". Although WP:LEADCITE doesn't say so explicitly, I think it would be a good idea to include an...
Click to read more »"Headquartered in Musashino, Tokyo" can be moved to the history section per WP:LEADCITE, as it's not particularly controversial. The revenue numbers in the infobox...
Click to read more »sources in the body. Timbouctou (talk) 13:35, 10 July 2011 (UTC) I agree, WP:LEADCITE does provide for omission of citations in the lead on "case by case basis"...
Click to read more »Mattximus (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC) Delist per all. There are plenty of LEADCITEs. The "Key" table can likely be merged in the main table if it isn't crufty...
Click to read more »references never hurt anyone. Axem Titanium (talk) 09:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE - They do actually harm tranclusion so without a justifiable reason they...
Click to read more »Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC) This is addressed in WP:LEADCITE. Many great leads have no citations at all. Plasticup T/C 14:48, 10 July...
Click to read more »include in the lead? If so, I would also include it in the infobox. Per MOS:LEADCITE, the lead should contain citations regarding information that could be...
Click to read more »with articles for U.S. cities, here are a few notes: Lead According to WP:LEADCITE, general information in the lead section need not be cited, especially...
Click to read more »committing the murder and asked that appeals in his case stop.[2] Per WP:LEADCITE, this citation belongs in the body, not the lead. Murder where he was working...
Click to read more »Citation numbers are from this revision. I'd remove citation 1 per MOS:LEADCITE. It seems a bit excessive to cite basic first-sentence information from...
Click to read more »body, which goes against MOS:INTRO --- see WP:LEADDD Also check for WP:LEADCITE. Not a requirement, but generally one should be able to do away with citations...
Click to read more »times. Is the existence of 24: Live Another Day controversial? Per WP:LEADCITE you don't need to source it in the lead if it is not. The same goes for...
Click to read more »suitable for its talk page. I'll just refute your main points: Per WP:LEADCITE, "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body...
Click to read more »used multiple times in the lead. WP:Lead I'm looking at the specific WP:LEADCITE section. Consider The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined...
Click to read more »did not mean the lead, in fact you do not need to cite the lead per WP:LEADCITE. I was referring to another section. -MBK004 03:33, 21 April 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »April 2011 (UTC) The intro shouldn't have a lot of references, per WP:LEADCITE, it would just be repeating the same citation. The intro is a summary of...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused...
Click to read more »place in the lead at all. Leads may (WP:WHENNOTCITE) – though need not (WP:LEADCITE) – omit sources since they are summaries of material cited in the body...
Click to read more »(and Rail Network page) is cited several times, and here I'll call in MOS:LEADCITE – you don't need redundant citations in the lead for things covered elsewhere...
Click to read more »and WP:LEAD I couldn't find anything at either pages which says this, WP:LEADCITE says "challenged or likely to be challenged, and quotations, should be...
Click to read more »dash used here is an en dash. Issue brought up on talk page here Read WP:LEADCITE about how the lead should generally not cite information that's also cited...
Click to read more »the new rewording need a citation still? I would prefer not to per WP:LEADCITE if it doesn't.陣内Jinnai 01:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC) "Dragon Warrior is...
Click to read more »duplicated or discussed in more detail in the body, with few exceptions, see WP:LEADCITE. According to the Middleton page, Milton Keynes Village is the name, so...
Click to read more »in its entirety yet, but here is some advice I have: - According to WP:LEADCITE, there should be very few (if any) citations in the lead section of the...
Click to read more »Do the two references in the lede need to be there? Would move per WP:LEADCITE, but up to you. Would suggest expanding on Obama's visit in the Aftermath...
Click to read more »something new. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC) Support Comment This...
Click to read more »here are my comments No citations please in the lead. WP:LEAD. Per WP:LEADCITE some claims need refs in lead. Quotes should always have cites directly...
Click to read more »WP:LEADCITE defers to WP:CITE and WP:RS, otherwise one could write anything in the lead section under this pretext; and in any case, WP:LEADCITE also...
Click to read more »film tie-in games." First off, quotes in the lead have to be sourced (WP:LEADCITE); secondly, this quote does jack for my understanding. "Play the movie...
Click to read more »living persons, should be supported by citations even in the lead. See WP:LEADCITE for more information. Shortcut WP:CONSECUTIVECITEWP:CONSECUTIVECITE Per...
Click to read more »would not fail the article for that at GA. For more info on this, see WP:LEADCITE and a current conversation on the topic with regard to FA candidates. There...
Click to read more »simply not important enough to be the second sentence of the lead. Per WP:LEADCITE, I think the quotes and specific figures could be removed, along with the...
Click to read more »(Unless there are any statements in the lead that need citations per MOS:LEADCITE.) Images. The 1968 images were uploaded as "own work" by an editor who...
Click to read more »problem. WP:LEADCITE does indeed say "Some material ... must be provided with an inline citation every time it is mentioned", but LEADCITE specifies that...
Click to read more »paragraph does need at least one reference except for lead sections (WP:LEADCITE) and plot sections of shows, books, movies, TV episodes, concerts, and...
Click to read more »better, move the list into a multi-column list into the article. Per WP:Leadcite, generally, avoid citations in the lead. Everything in the lead has to...
Click to read more »overcitation concern. The lead of the article doesn't need citations, per WP:LEADCITE, as the information is supposed to be the body of the article (and cited...
Click to read more »used in the lead section if the material is repeated in the body. See WP:Leadcite. "Andy Warhol | Marilyn Monroe 22 | 1967 | Hamilton-Selway". Hamilton-Selway...
Click to read more »/ WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC) Per WP:LEADCITE, most if not all of these cites should be in the article body, but not...
Click to read more »expanded. There are also refs in the lead, which is unnecessary as per WP:LEADCITE. Done. 16:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC) The third paragraph of the Gameplay...
Click to read more »likely to be challenged by a reader encountering it the first time, see WP:LEADCITE. I don't think your lede is controversial in anyway, so I would argue that...
Click to read more »this article is close to a keep. Why are there citations in the lead? WP:LEADCITE says they are unnecessary. Has all this information been cited in the article...
Click to read more »wording of this nature, yet the word "mandatory" does not occur there. MOS:LEADCITE says: Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body...
Click to read more »2019 GAR. There are citations in the lead, which should be removed per WP:LEADCITE. (Fixed. Y) The final paragraph of Elevator video is an WP:MNA and reads...
Click to read more »should be in the body and thus isn't needed in the lead at all per WP:LEADCITE. They're both from the university, one appears to be a dead version of...
Click to read more »the article. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 03:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC) per WP:LEADCITE, he lead normally doesn't require inline citations, as all that information...
Click to read more »paragraphs, should be carefully sourced as appropriate..." Hohum (talk) WP:LEADCITE states that, basically, if everything in the lead is covered and cited...
Click to read more »that you are probably correct on this point. I made you aware that per WP:LEADCITE, facts are sourced in the main body of an article rather than the lead...
Click to read more »I do assume the lead needs to be referenced better if I am judging WP:LEADCITE correctly. Afro (Talk) 04:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC) I've fixed the triumvirate...
Click to read more »September 2015 (UTC) Comments Why so many citations in the lead? See WP:LEADCITE Generally overlinked - some terms are linked more than once in a single...
Click to read more »number of A class articles do not have cited leads. Having said this WP:LEADCITE also states that citations can be added to the lead. — AustralianRupert...
Click to read more »also think most of those citations in the lead could be removed per WP:LEADCITE.陣内Jinnai 23:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC) Sounds good; implemented all concerns...
Click to read more »22 August 2021 (UTC) Citations in the lead are not forbidden, as per WP:LEADCITE. The reason I asked for one for the particular point mentioned above was...
Click to read more »Looking at you, kid 18:16, 8 April 2019 (UTC) Please try and comply with WP:LEADCITE. Introduce Nikkhil Advani with his full name linked somewhere under the...
Click to read more »is nothing wrong with having citations in the lede, I would follow WP:LEADCITE, but this is only a recommendation. It is strange though that certain information...
Click to read more »jab_row_in_Karnataka. [2].2 (Unrelated to other diff) Explained at MOS:LEADCITE [3] (Unrelated to other diff) see Template:Current/doc#Guidelines [4] (Unrelated...
Click to read more »what I believed to be spurious accusations of failed verification and LEADCITE (in the opposite manner of how I interpreted it); the other party would...
Click to read more »be) a summary of the main article, where the information is cited. MOS:LEADCITE and MOS:LEADREL indicate quotations may be used. IMO, the quotations of...
Click to read more »I haven't actually checked this article, but note that according to WP:LEADCITE, the lead can either be uncited or cited, as long as the convention is...
Click to read more »any tools. Done.--TaerkastUA (Talk) 10:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC) *per WP:LEADCITE, we don't need those extra citations in the intro paragraph. Several of...
Click to read more »Island Railway. I see MOS issues also, per WP:FA?.2, regarding both WP:LEADCITE and MOS:SANDWICH. These points are certainly easier to rectify than the...
Click to read more »article. I don't know why references in the lead would be removed, as per WP:LEADCITE (part of WP:LEAD) the lead has the same citation requirements as the rest...
Click to read more »to avoid redundancy, per WP:LEADCITE. However, WP:BURDEN specifically states that all quotations should be cited. LEADCITE advises us that a case-by-case...
Click to read more »06:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC) Source review - spotchecks not done Per WP:LEADCITE, direct quotes should be cited in the lead, even if they're repeated in...
Click to read more »that was long-term stable content), but that is now given an explicit LEADCITE. So I still don't understand what your good-faith objection might possibly...
Click to read more »Diffs of the user's reverts: 15:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC) "/* top */ WP:LEADCITE" 13:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC) "/* Health, illness, and death */ not improvements"...
Click to read more »I haven't actually checked this article, but note that according to WP:LEADCITE, the lead can either be uncited or cited, as long as the convention is...
Click to read more »others quoted WP:NONENG. Another policy-based argument that was made was WP:LEADCITE which says: "Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many...
Click to read more »Therapeutics #Over-referencing at 02:33, 8 February 2018. I made clear that WP:LEADCITE gives guidance on referencing in the lead. I certainly do not accept that...
Click to read more »citations in the lead (which contradicts the far wider consensus that WP:LEADCITE represents) or whatever else, but they do not exist outside the confines...
Click to read more »June 2018 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE - things like quotations should be cited even in the lead That is a rather strict reading of LEADCITE, it says cites are neither...
Click to read more »13 November 2022 (UTC) noex I also think it might be a good idea to WP:LEADCITE notwithstanding, cite that in the intro or add it somewhere in the body...
Click to read more »references in the lead, unless it is a very tall claim or a quote. Read WP: LEADCITE. Done: Moved references to somewhere else. "The film features Shah Rukh...
Click to read more »The claim doesn't seem so controversial that it would need it under WP:LEADCITE. I moved it to the first section of the body, since the more useful information...
Click to read more »important to retain it, I'd suggest raising it on the talk page. Citing MOS:LEADCITE is in no way an exception to the 3RR, either. --slakr\ talk / 03:34, 18...
Click to read more »omitted cites in the lead. But this close requires them even though WP:LEADCITE says "The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »I do assume the lead needs to be referenced better if I am judging WP:LEADCITE correctly. Afro (Talk) 04:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC) I've fixed the triumvirate...
Click to read more »and lead sections are not exempt from the verifiability policy. see WP:LEADCITE" 22:56, 30 May 2017 (UTC) "WP:BOLDAVOID" 22:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC) "Undid...
Click to read more »this is not true; the source is in the body of the article, and per WP:LEADCITE it does not need to be repeated at the start of the article. These points...
Click to read more »A-Class criteria. If anything it's perhaps over-cited (see WP:CITE and WP:LEADCITE; unless an article comes under WP:BIO, I see no need for extensive citations...
Click to read more »sources in the body. Timbouctou (talk) 13:35, 10 July 2011 (UTC) I agree, WP:LEADCITE does provide for omission of citations in the lead on "case by case basis"...
Click to read more »properly covered in the main text, they need no citations in the lead (WP:LEADCITE). That has been fixed. Disavian (talk) 20:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Talking...
Click to read more »and support. I note that even when the "no refs" lead syle is used, WP:LEADCITE still requires refs for quotations, material likely to be challenged (usually...
Click to read more »who is a living person. Given the high standard expected in BLPs, and WP:LEADCITE, I am concerned about there being no cites in the lead for the following:...
Click to read more »all citations from the lead per WP:LEADCITE. I reverted the etymology edit (User:JimWae also reverted the leadcite edit) as I felt it was undue weight...
Click to read more »include references if the material is cited later in the article (see WP:LEADCITE). Most of the information in the lead isn't controversial (such as the...
Click to read more »written and cited in the body, citations are redundant in the lead (WP:LEADCITE) 3) semicolons before conjunctions like and is an unnecessary, outdated...
Click to read more »cited directly in the lede since it is contentious BLP material. See WP:LEADCITE.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Fixed, thanks for...
Click to read more »possible, could this be sourced? Unless you think it's unnecessary per WP:LEADCITE, I would cite them. I can't find any source that states this explicitly...
Click to read more »opinion.) -Widened – sgeureka t•c 18:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Per WP:LEADCITE and general FAC practice, the lead generally repeats information that appears...
Click to read more »opinion. Also, the quote would require a source even in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. I suggest mentioning the details of the critical reception and commercial...
Click to read more »referenced.Pyrotec (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2026 (UTC) @Pyrotec: Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead normally does not need citations as that information should also...
Click to read more »it's valid to remove it. Similarly, if a source can be removed, as per WP:LEADCITE, I've always assumed it's not valid to simply restore it with a sarcastic...
Click to read more »problems and citing part of a policy and ignoring other relevant parts (P:LEADCITE part of WP:LEAD case in point)? Your claim that "the reliability of these...
Click to read more »there are already so many unnecessary links cluttering up the lead (MOS:LEADCITE), I just don't know why Keystone18 wants to go to war over this except...
Click to read more »layout of the article and also the lead does not always need refs (MOS:LEADCITE). ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC) I just reverted...
Click to read more »13 January 2016 (UTC) Sort of correct, but that's not exactly what WP:LEADCITE says. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC) User has been...
Click to read more »is this very necessary edit to remove 17 citations from the lead per WP:LEADCITE. [56] In addition, this is the same RfC that Cornerstonepicker canvassed...
Click to read more »can't be used for Lind's views), his inclusion in the lead violates WP:LEADCITE and you're only trying to include it there to further violate the strong...
Click to read more »the best-known recordings, and sources aren't needed in the lead (see WP:LEADCITE). If you see someone is in the middle of expanding an article, and they...
Click to read more »cited as long as what the text says is elsewhere in the article per MOS:LEADCITE. But the text in general was blatantly not a good summary of the article...
Click to read more »edits. The article has benefited after Noteduck pointed to WP:ROWN and MOS:LEADCITE. I do not agree that there was a 1RR violation or that Springee is a faultless...
Click to read more »2020 (UTC) Contentious labels require citations, even in the lead. MOS:LEADCITE. And I will note that C&C's RfC does not address the most contentious of...
Click to read more »the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body..." (WP:LEADCITE). Dan56 (talk) 04:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC) Featured articles are supposed...
Click to read more »often controversial, and often to the lead of an article (but it's not a LEADCITE issue; the claims are new information not sourced elsewhere in the article)...
Click to read more »"documentaries", and that he is a "documentarian" and "filmmaker". Per WP:LEADCITE, "The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »the talk page that the edits in issue are good content. Moreover, Per LeadCite, the material has stood in the lead, and is cited in the body of the article...
Click to read more »direct quotations. See WP:LEADCITE. Aa77zz (talk) 12:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC) I must admit, I was unaware of the WP:LEADCITE policy! The citations are...
Click to read more »cases), as is usually done on Wikipedia articles? It's allowed by MOS:LEADCITE for uncontroversial content, which a summary of well-referenced details...
Click to read more »[78]Addition of contentious material to lede without sourcing as required by WP:LEADCITE "Some material, including direct quotations and contentious material about...
Click to read more »references if the contents are found elsewhere in the article. See MOS:LEADCITE. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC) But the contents...
Click to read more »pet hate of mine. They're not against the FA criteria per se, but per WP:LEADCITE, they shouldn't be there if not necessary (because the lead is intended...
Click to read more »my understanding is that space-grant is not particularly important. MOS:LEADCITE has not been followed; many excess citations in the lead. ”Agricultural...
Click to read more »editor to add references in to those parts. Aaron • You Da One Per WP:LEADCITE references are only really needed for contentious info. Things already...
Click to read more »without); Missing Publisher; Missing Year/Date As far as prose goes: Per WP:LEADCITE, the citations in the lede are not required, and some will advocate removal...
Click to read more »citations in the lead have been properly removed in accordance with WP:LEADCITE. There is no actionable stability issue as I said and previous FARs concluded...
Click to read more »well done. But ledes usually don't need too many citations, as per WP:LEADCITE, although it confused me when I first started editing. Professor Penguino...
Click to read more »years, I feel that citing fifteen refs on one fact to be overkill per WP:LEADCITE and visually unappealing/distracting per WP:FL?'s Cr.6. Comments are welcome...
Click to read more »in the lead is sourced in the article body, it doesn't matter, per WP:LEADCITE. Et3rnal 15:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Yes it does, but as you can see from...
Click to read more »(talk) 02:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC) @Gronk Oz I think it is stated at MOS:LEADCITE. Jolly1253 (talk) 02:36, 30 November 2022 (UTC) See...
Click to read more »skipped the redirect. Needs a reference. Comment It already is. Per WP:LEADCITE, when the lead is summarising information in the body of the article (ref...
Click to read more »skipped the redirect. Needs a reference. Comment It already is. Per WP:LEADCITE, when the lead is summarising information in the body of the article (ref...
Click to read more »September 2015 (UTC) A few sentences in the lead are unreferenced. Yes, per WP:LEADCITE, this is where the information comes from the list below. Harrias talk...
Click to read more »only information without references comes from the table, and per MOS:LEADCITE, information that is in the lead, but is cited in the main body of the...
Click to read more »(UTC) WP:LEADCITE says to use citations when needed in the lead just as in any other section. Anomie⚔ 11:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC) From WP:LEADCITE: The necessity...
Click to read more »2021 (UTC) A lot of the lede requires referencing. Can you clarify? MOS:LEADCITE This lede is a recap of the rest of the article, which is extensively sourced...
Click to read more »2010." Needs source. That's all sourced in the body of the article. WP:LEADCITE says not to add references to information that is sourced in the body....
Click to read more »they summarize the tables (i.e. it's already cited in the body per MOS:LEADCITE), but the rest should have citations to reliable sources. Outstanding Comic...
Click to read more »(and linked to) in the article's main body. Yes, you have the choice - WP:LEADCITE. Johnbod (talk) 11:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC) 2. In the "Fakes and revised attributions"...
Click to read more »the lead as they are simply summarising what's in the article, see WP:LEADCITE. However, there isn't really a hard and fast rule, some FL-class discogs...
Click to read more »a high-quality RS, but that cite itself seems to be unnecessary per WP:LEADCITE. Ref 2 has the wrong title this RS/N discussion does not lend me with confidence...
Click to read more »spotchecks not done Quotes should be cited immediately in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC) Is there a page...
Click to read more »article, thus don't have much citations as they're not mandatory per MOS:LEADCITE. Most ESPNcricinfo sources uses the {{ESPNcricinfo 2}} citation template...
Click to read more »Mattximus (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC) Delist per all. There are plenty of LEADCITEs. The "Key" table can likely be merged in the main table if it isn't crufty...
Click to read more »Standardise date form used per MOS:NUM No need for citations in lead per WP:LEADCITE Add the publisher/work in some sources, like source 20 Not necessary, but...
Click to read more »OH&S issue. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Comment - per WP:LEADCITE, that string of nine cites in the lead should probably move elsewhere or...
Click to read more »why is the fact that the game was created by the people who made Ico WP:LEADCITE worthy, but not that it's a spiritual successor?) A few bits n' bobs don't...
Click to read more »per WP:LEADCITE you shouldn't really have to cite much, if anything, in it. Ryan Norton 19:25, 25 August 2010 (UTC) Same concern (WP:LEADCITE) was brought...
Click to read more »lead as a guideline. Arlen22 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2010 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 16:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC) In order to create...
Click to read more »be placed in the main text. Please see WP:V, WP:LEAD and especially WP:LEADCITE for more information. In the actual lead i would cite all quotes (or rephrase...
Click to read more »challenged" means, the various places where citations are not needed at all (WP:LEADCITE) and the philosophical debate of WP:You don't need to cite that the sky...
Click to read more »(talk) 21:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC) I think it’s the same principle as MOS:leadcite Olliefant (she/her) 08:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC) Except that this isn't in...
Click to read more »an improvement on stale forks, though some have complained that (per WP:LEADCITE and established practice on the Main Page) they omit references etc. Reversions...
Click to read more »cited. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE is the specific section. CTF83! 11:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks for...
Click to read more »citations in the lead even though it's not included in the body – see MOS:LEADCITE. Unfortunately, that one citation is the only way to prove it was the fifth...
Click to read more »part of the article, and prove their value and validity there (see MOS:LEADCITE). To return to the Noam Chomsky-examle: you will find hardly any references...
Click to read more »lead sections have the strongest verifiability requirements as per MOS:LEADCITE, and ever-changing statistics are unlikely to be recorded in a reliable...
Click to read more »material. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC) Lede * As per WP:LEADCITE, there are no sources and that makes the lead section look clean. The same...
Click to read more »Editorofthewiki[citation needed] 19:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC) According to WP:LEADCITE, "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors...
Click to read more »There is a citation in the lead for the injuries to the skull. Per WP:LEADCITE, I think this is something that could be better explained in the article...
Click to read more »August 2013 (UTC) @Cyphoidbomb: The Ali article is a different case. Per WP:LEADCITE, we don't have to cite statements in the opening paragraph if they're cited...
Click to read more »also cited in the following paragraph. It's been my understanding of MOS:LEADCITE that facts cited in the body of the article do not require a separate citation...
Click to read more »lead so you don't have to repeat it (this one of the exceptions to WP:LEADCITE) Not sure that's really a convention, but it looks incomplete to not have...
Click to read more »guideline. In particular, that is definitely not the lesson that the WP:LEADCITE subsection wants you to learn. It makes me wonder if you have read the...
Click to read more »it has a section on recurrences? Done Partly done - I'm aware of MOS:LEADCITE and had been trying to limit refs in the lead, I included those three citations...
Click to read more »nitpicky, is welcome. Hog Farm Bacon 02:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC) Per MOS:LEADCITE avoid citing citations in the lead. Done I'd like to see more info in the...
Click to read more »summarizes information for which sources are given later in the article WP:LEADCITE says: Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body...
Click to read more »for some of the statements lacking them; others I think fall under WP:LEADCITE or WP:BLUE. Are there any particular statements remaining that you think...
Click to read more »While I doubt there will be a challenge, I thought it necessary. Per WP:LEADCITE: The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every...
Click to read more »popularity polls, or anything quoting anno's words) in the lede, per MOS:LEADCITE. will reply with more if i have any ideas :3 astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 19:26...
Click to read more »is to not use cites at all in the lead unless absolutely necessary; WP:LEADCITE is a bit more flexible. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I will...
Click to read more »different schools of thought about redundancy of citations in the lead (see WP:LEADCITE) with the gist being that only controversial claims NEED to be cited. I...
Click to read more »summarize facts which will be sourced later on in the article. I disagree. WP:LEADCITE says there should be fewer sources, but it is not required to be devoid...
Click to read more »IDLI apply, also in addressing LEADCITE. I did find some problems (some kindly addressed), For example: MOS:LEADCITE is pretty much required for FAs...
Click to read more »doesn't require citations if they are within the body of an article WP:LEADCITE. --GloMonsterTalk 18:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC) GloMonster Your edit appeared...
Click to read more »and for the same reason, it's unusual to use citations in the lead (MOS:LEADCITE) except for direct quotations and things that are likely to be edit-warred...
Click to read more »not done Direct quotes should be cited immediately in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC) Dead links...
Click to read more »Shouldn't Ashley's quote at the end of the 1st paragraph be cited? WP:LEADCITE suggests that "direct quotations [in the lead] should be supported by an...
Click to read more »should either be expanded on in the lead or left out. There are also LEADCITEs which while not fatal with the criteria are not needed given that they...
Click to read more »Claims like such should include citations since it is challengeable (See WP:LEADCITE). "prominent" or "common"? " MTV has refused to play two of the band's...
Click to read more »article. In the lead, sources should be given if using direct quotes. WP:LEADCITE says quotes "should be", not "must be" cited. The same words are used in...
Click to read more »information is in the body, references shoudn't go here (excepting WP:LEADCITE). Content summary "Meals and appetizers are discussed.[11][12]" Too short...
Click to read more »necessarily need to be sourced if the content is sourced lower; this is per WP:LEADCITE. Nightscream, I wasn't so much talking about material being completely...
Click to read more »leave my comments here. Reduce the number of citations in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. Use {{sort}} on cells with quotation marks so they sort in order. Is there...
Click to read more »quote within a quote). I'm not a fan of citations in the lead, and as WP:LEADCITE says to only provide them for contentious material, I think we should be...
Click to read more »not with a quote. And while quotes are not prohibited from the lead (WP:LEADCITE) (I have used them many times), "Citations are often omitted from the lead...
Click to read more »not contain any references. TGilmour (talk) 02:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE says of the lead, "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged...
Click to read more »those citations to the body would greatly improve readability. See WP:LEADCITE. Reduced from six references to two. I know you wikilink NTSB in the lead...
Click to read more »References in the lead should probably be moved to the article body, per MOS:LEADCITE I've extended the lead somewhat to cover the key points and moved the refs...
Click to read more »of the word "film" as much as possible. This section complies with WP:LEADCITE, and that's not a concern. Plot I say the actor names are best removed...
Click to read more »don't understand why just one sentence in the lead is referenced? See MOS:LEADCITE, we should be able to move that into the main body too. Moved. --Bcschneider53...
Click to read more »of water fluoridation is complex, current, and controversial, and as WP:LEADCITE says, the article's lead therefore needs many citations. "Note that ref...
Click to read more »the citations in the main body and have none at all in the lead. See WP:LEADCITE. However, the policy section ought to be cited, and may be cut if this...
Click to read more »sourced in the body would be challenged, are these really necessary per WP:LEADCITE?--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the support...
Click to read more »Story (2004)." Source? Source is in the main article below. As per WP:LEADCITE, citations in the Lead are minimal.Gprince007 (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2010...
Click to read more »should appear in the body of the text (where it is already cited) - see WP:LEADCITE. If this is the case then you may be able to ditch the citation here. The...
Click to read more »have of the article is that there are references in the lead section. WP:LEADCITE recommends against redundant citations in the lead for things that are...
Click to read more »template for ideology section, per talk suggestion(s), will follow MOS:LEADCITE, as infobox will reflect section(s) within article, alongside its reliable...
Click to read more »October 2013 (UTC) Quick comment: Why so many citations in the lead? See WP:LEADCITE. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC) I've removed several that...
Click to read more »(UTC) There is not that much exception to citing in the lead WP:LEAD, WP:LEADCITE. "You will find that uncited leads of this nature are the default expectation...
Click to read more »reliable source. Special arrangements apply to the lead section (see WP:LEADCITE). A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused...
Click to read more »suitable for its talk page. I'll just refute your main points: Per WP:LEADCITE, "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body...
Click to read more »editor to add references in to those parts. Aaron • You Da One Per WP:LEADCITE references are only really needed for contentious info. Things already...
Click to read more »2026 (UTC) Support Arconning (talk) 07:22, 29 April 2026 (UTC) A few MOS:LEADCITE violations As all three citations support either evaluative claims or direct...
Click to read more »trying to follow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 13 April 2016 (UTC) Per WP:LEADCITE, citations are usually discouraged from the lead unless it's citing controversial...
Click to read more »June 2026 (UTC) Is it possible to remove two citations a lead per MOS:LEADCITE? 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 15:30, 24 May 2026 (UTC) You ask this and simultaneously...
Click to read more »22:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Actually, you're wrong again. See Wikipedia:LEADCITE. Please educate yourself before copycating the other arguments in this...
Click to read more »doesnt need to be since its cited in the main body It has to; per MOS:LEADCITE, "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or...
Click to read more »the lead. Of course it's not cited; it doesn't strictly have to be. WP:LEADCITE. Anyway, there are 9 citations in the lead; you found a problem with one...
Click to read more »only required when they support potentially contentious statements – MOS:LEADCITE); although, given the article's here at AfD, I acknowledge that the...
Click to read more »none of which appear to be justified by the spirit or the letter of WP:LEADCITE. This issue is symptomatic of a larger problem in that the article has...
Click to read more »Conspiracy theory article is having some POV problems. I am trying to follow WP:LEADCITE and am supported by Mystichumwipe and Mystylplx but we have editors reverting...
Click to read more »2020 (UTC) Comments by John M Wolfson I'm surprised at the amount of LEADCITEs. They're certainly not prohibited by any guideline, but modern standard...
Click to read more »of an article that is most likely to be challenged by visitors. See: WP:LEADCITE. Regards, RJH (talk) 14:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC) Fair enough, I've indicated...
Click to read more »(talk) 23:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC) With all due respect, that's not what WP:LEADCITE says. I find this useful: "editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant...
Click to read more »to include the reference to a massacre in the lead of the article. WP:LEADCITE specifically says Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require...
Click to read more »life, people lit bonfires around London" would be better cited per WP:LEADCITE. The lead says "Celebrating the fact that King James I had survived the...
Click to read more »immaterial to this review.) Here are some issues: There are too many LEADCITEs, much in common with other late-2000s FA promotions; they are not forbidden...
Click to read more »'support' from me. There are two cites in the lead, should not be there per WP:LEADCITE as long as the facts are cited later. Gaultier does not use the hyphen...
Click to read more »citations be move out of the lead and into the records section per WP:LEADCITE Done That's interesting. No one has ever brought that up before on previous...
Click to read more »the name of the article? Fixed. Try to avoid refs in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE. The policy states that refs in the lead are determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »at a shortened first paragraph (Also, I removed the citations per MOS:LEADCITE since nothing here is likely to be challenged, as you are not making any...
Click to read more »challenged, such as claims about "tuft of hair" and "Latin for curl". (See WP:LEADCITE.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC) Comment (GermanJoe) Oppose...
Click to read more »(Talk) 23:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC) I think Kailash was referring to WP:LEADCITE, which indicates that citations are generally not used in lead sections...
Click to read more »And the complete version of that quote is used (and cited) later. Per WP:LEADCITE: "The lead must conform to verifiability and other policies. The verifiability...
Click to read more »only required when they support potentially contentious statements – MOS:LEADCITE); although, given the article's here at AfD, I acknowledge that the...
Click to read more »necessary and makes the text cluttered and more difficult to read. See MOS:LEADCITE. There are links to common words such as: pharmaceutical, depression, obesity...
Click to read more »04:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC) Lead Why the citation? In accordance with MOS:LEADCITE, I added that citation since this statement is not repeated anywhere in...
Click to read more »and Austria doesn't seem controversial or challengeable according to MOS:LEADCITE. "In January 1742 the Imperial election was held at Frankfurt, where Bavarian...
Click to read more »repeated, and cited, elsewhere in the body, which would be my preference, MOS:LEADCITE. But it is possible I'm wrong on this. I know it was discussed at GAR,...
Click to read more »diffhist m Peter Mandelson 08:30 −12 Martinevans123 talk contribs (WP:LEADCITE and copy down (if needed at all?)) diffhist Fabian Society 08:27 +490 ~2026-35300-90...
Click to read more »have, but do not usually require, inline citations (WP:NOTCITE and MOS:LEADCITE). Content that is unreasonable to challenge may not require a source. On...
Click to read more »resolved. Secondly, why are there all those citations in the lede? See MOS:LEADCITE. -Indy beetle (talk) 23:54, 5 March 2022 (UTC) @Indy beetle Missing pages...
Click to read more »citations are not required in the lead (generally). This is discussed at WP:LEADCITE; you'll see most featured articles on non-controversial topics have citation-free...
Click to read more »consolidated to a single cite. I cleaned up the remainder consistent with WP:LEADCITE. The artifact of starting the cite tags with the "[15]" is a function of...
Click to read more »back in August you used WP:LEADCITE as one of your arguments (in BLP/N Archive 131, James O'Keefe). Why don't you think LEADCITE applies to the sentence...
Click to read more »all aware of the two citation conventions. I was working off Wikipedia:LEADCITE; could you point out the location of a description of these alternate lead...
Click to read more »Iry-Hor (talk) 08:39, 31 July 2015 (UTC) Another point is that per WP:LEADCITE, that sentence really shouldn't have an inline citation, since it ought...
Click to read more »Hurricanehink (talk) 17:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC) Comments from Ctjf83 Per WP:LEADCITE you should remove references, as all the other info should be presented...
Click to read more »does not because there are no inline citations in the article's lead (MOS:LEADCITE). Rjjiii (talk) 03:06, 25 September 2025 (UTC) Boats, maps, pirates, what's...
Click to read more »summarize article's content, sources in the lead are unneeded (expecting [[WP:LEADCITE|direct quotes and BLP issues). It's up to you. Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 19:53, 17 May...
Click to read more »(UTC) There is not that much exception to citing in the lead WP:LEAD, WP:LEADCITE. "You will find that uncited leads of this nature are the default expectation...
Click to read more »quotes, or is this an actual one-word quote? If its the later, then per WP:LEADCITE you need to add in-line attribution. Direct quote. Added the ref. — Crisco...
Click to read more »Kaito should have the references in the infobox moveed to the prose per WP:LEADCITE, but its fine for C-class. ... .陣内Jinnai 15:57, 3 September 2011 (UTC)...
Click to read more »22 August 2021 (UTC) Citations in the lead are not forbidden, as per WP:LEADCITE. The reason I asked for one for the particular point mentioned above was...
Click to read more »19 October 2009 (UTC) I've had it raised on a number of mine, but WP:LEADCITE seems flexible. Excellent work. I read it through, good work.--Wehwalt...
Click to read more »section too. Thanks Etrangere (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE has the information you seek. wodup 06:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC) I'm...
Click to read more »don't understand why just one sentence in the lead is referenced? See MOS:LEADCITE, we should be able to move that into the main body too. Moved. --Bcschneider53...
Click to read more »down in the body of the article. However, I was previously directed to WP:LEADCITE which says "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged...
Click to read more »"identity strengthening" → quotations in lead require citation per MOS:LEADCITE "its songs explored" → its song explore "but one considered that the EP...
Click to read more »the lead; they should be relocated to the body where appropriate. MOS:LEADCITE Also, "hit singles"? That is a puffery word, which is not neutral MOS:PUFFERY...
Click to read more »wouldn't be? I replaced it with a more complete version. Is it passable? WP:LEADCITE says in part The lead must conform to verifiability and other policies...
Click to read more »ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC) Hi ChrisTheDude, yeah, it's at MOS:LEADCITE - quotes and anything likely to be challenged. - SchroCat (talk) 16:32...
Click to read more »only information without references comes from the table, and per MOS:LEADCITE, information that is in the lead, but is cited in the main body of the...
Click to read more »"tan lines" and its lyrics are about "letting go of your worries". Per WP:LEADCITE a citation is needed here, but this could be paraphrased with a little...
Click to read more »facts so contentious that they are “likely to be challenged” (per MOS:LEADCITE)? ✓ Omission error. The facts are referenced in the body. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam)...
Click to read more »sex. Per WP:LEADCITE, this needs in-line attribution. I have not provided in-line citations in the lead per following mention at WP:LEADCITE. "Because the...
Click to read more »without citations. Is there a reason for doing it differently here? See MOS:LEADCITE (The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC) Also, per WP:LEADCITE, the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged...
Click to read more »October 2014 (UTC) @Fangz:The lede is cited later in the body text, per WP:LEADCITE. The reviews are referenced in full citations in the article. The other...
Click to read more »their preference for no lead citations. Neither the FA criteria, nor MOS:LEADCITE, say "don't fully cite the lead" or "don't cite every lead sentence". But...
Click to read more »The claim doesn't seem so controversial that it would need it under WP:LEADCITE. I moved it to the first section of the body, since the more useful information...
Click to read more »notice, but I feel this statement would still warrant citing under WP:LEADCITE. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Fixed. Polytope24 (talk)...
Click to read more »this as a controversial fact that warrants a citation in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. Is that all you are looking for, a citation to back-up the naming of the...
Click to read more »section etc. Refs in the lead are all unneeded and unnecessary, see WP:LEADCITE Lot of missing refs in the Climate section The Approaches last doesn't...
Click to read more »it gets very confusing if some parts of the lead sentences rely on WP:LEADCITE and others on the cites. Someone will have to recheck #1. Jo-Jo Eumerus...
Click to read more »necessary? The reference at the end of the lead can be removed, per WP:LEADCITE. All points addressed. As per the last point about the reference, that...
Click to read more »July 2012 (UTC) Comment: There are a lot of citations in the lead. Per WP:LEADCITE, it seems that these citations are redundant as the info is already backed...
Click to read more »had been patrolling the article I would have likely commented on the MOS:LEADCITE which was, in my assessment, WP:OVERCITE. The citations which have been...
Click to read more »22:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Actually, you're wrong again. See Wikipedia:LEADCITE. Please educate yourself before copycating the other arguments in this...
Click to read more »here in the lead we have "sad girl" and "aggressive" unattended to MOS:LEADCITE says this is completely redundant when the information in the lead is cited...
Click to read more »mentioned in the body. The pronouncation one can be kept. Not done: Per MOS:LEADCITE, direct quotations always require a citation. "Haruf and Koon separated...
Click to read more »in the lead. --Efe (talk) 15:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Care to read WP:LEADCITE? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC) "critics have compared...
Click to read more »Wagner himself called some of his later works, 'music dramas')". Per WP:LEADCITE: "direct quotations ... must be provided with an inline citation every...
Click to read more »for all quotations." I think the idea is sort of like the idea behind WP:LEADCITE. However the point is moot for this example since the main article is not...
Click to read more »30 December 2014 (UTC) The lead doesn't need those citations, per WP:LEADCITE Debatable; but there are probably inconsistent levels of citation. Either...
Click to read more »any tools. Done.--TaerkastUA (Talk) 10:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC) *per WP:LEADCITE, we don't need those extra citations in the intro paragraph. Several of...
Click to read more »always have conversions (Template:Convert is helpful for this). Per WP:LEADCITE, if statements in the lead are included in the article below, then they...
Click to read more »September 2015 (UTC) A few sentences in the lead are unreferenced. Yes, per WP:LEADCITE, this is where the information comes from the list below. Harrias talk...
Click to read more »Comments Some of the citations in the Lede can be removed or moved, per WP:LEADCITE The WP:LEAD should either be fully cited or fully uncited. I have to add...
Click to read more »incorporate. AmateurEditor (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC) Please look at WP:LEADCITE as well. Also, I'm not "challenging" your phraseology. But it seems to...
Click to read more »for some reason; definitely too many There a substantial amount of WP:LEADCITE, and the lead in general seems far too short, especially when compared...
Click to read more »Spengouli (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)( Posted in spite of the MOS:LEADCITE problem the sourcing has introduced. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:42, 30 March...
Click to read more »content in the lead. More detailed guidance on this issue can be found at WP:LEADCITE. Direct quotations and controversial assertions should be referenced in...
Click to read more »further supporting opposition: 1. Lede overciting and overquoting: MOS:LEADCITE and throughout the article, WP:CITEKILL 2. Sources on muscle wasting and...
Click to read more »(and believe me, they exist). Does the citation hurt anything? Per WP:LEADCITE "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors...
Click to read more »the library in the academic literature over the past decade [2] [3] WP:LEADCITE issues Severe need for additional citations or trimming of uncited material...
Click to read more »any more inconsistencies that exist and if this is consistent with MOS:LEADCITE.hundenvonPG (talk) 13:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC) (t · c) buidhe 04:55, 13...
Click to read more »to be) in the article, it is not necessary to cite here (expecting WP:LEADCITE. The cast section should be like this. The infobox includes Japan release...
Click to read more »in the lead is sourced in the article body, it doesn't matter, per WP:LEADCITE. Et3rnal 15:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Yes it does, but as you can see from...
Click to read more »the lead are unecessary per WP:LEADCITE Citations are permitted if statements have been challenged in the past. WP:LEADCITE says "The presence of citations...
Click to read more »unavailable for the journals. Min968 (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE violations Fixed. I don't like the use of bullet points for the family...
Click to read more »in the lede? Hello!Zigzig20s (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE. It's cited in the body, so it doesn't need to be cited in the lead. And...
Click to read more »something she didn't like. -- GreenC 01:32, 31 December 2018 (UTC) MOS:LEADCITE, that is sourced in the body. Determination of scientific consensus is...
Click to read more »have of the article is that there are references in the lead section. WP:LEADCITE recommends against redundant citations in the lead for things that are...
Click to read more »noteworthy rectors would also work well here to enhance the lede. Also per WP:LEADCITE, because the lede contains information that is cited below in the prose...
Click to read more »now, but for the "obnoxious teenager" quote at the end of the lead, MOS:LEADCITE would want a ref for this. Easily fixed: just copy-paste {{sfn|Watson|2021|p=19}}...
Click to read more »unprovoked I might add. --GabeMc (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC) From WP:LEADCITE "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or likely...
Click to read more »2010." Needs source. That's all sourced in the body of the article. WP:LEADCITE says not to add references to information that is sourced in the body....
Click to read more »day & year in the lead section, and this seems to be ok according to MOS:LEADCITE. So although The Rambling Man is of course correct that it is a weak article...
Click to read more »reference - unfortunately, the situation is a bit murky because of WP:LEADCITE. HTH, Samsara 12:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC) There's a talk page discussion...
Click to read more »comments: I've referenced all of the article's prose, except the lead per WP:LEADCITE. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:19, 24 October 2021 (UTC) Comment One cn tag...
Click to read more »2021 (UTC) A lot of the lede requires referencing. Can you clarify? MOS:LEADCITE This lede is a recap of the rest of the article, which is extensively sourced...
Click to read more »designs is relevant here. Citations, can be removed from the lead per MOS:LEADCITE providing the facts are cited elsewhere. Cite number 4 appears after 'Luftwaffe'...
Click to read more »information in the lead doesn't appear in the body, it needs citations (see WP:LEADCITE) e.g. "Hellenistic Judaism blended both Greek and Jewish traditions." which...
Click to read more »OH&S issue. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Comment - per WP:LEADCITE, that string of nine cites in the lead should probably move elsewhere or...
Click to read more »Dantheanimator (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2020 (UTC) @Dantheanimator: per MOS:LEADCITE: "The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in...
Click to read more »lead isn't mentioned in the body The lead doesn't need to be cited per WP:LEADCITE, but I don't know if it's a FA criteria. Potentially I'll go through the...
Click to read more »August 2023 (UTC) Is there a reason to include citations in the lead? (MOS:LEADCITE) (I think British-American follows from place of Birth and later citizenship...
Click to read more »that allows for a straightforward citation, but I presume that under MOS:LEADCITE it should be fine. I'm not sure that there is a more appropriate name for...
Click to read more »the lead as they are simply summarising what's in the article, see WP:LEADCITE. However, there isn't really a hard and fast rule, some FL-class discogs...
Click to read more »they summarize the tables (i.e. it's already cited in the body per MOS:LEADCITE), but the rest should have citations to reliable sources. Outstanding Comic...
Click to read more »Philippine entertainment industry. Kloyan.L (talk) 07:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC) MOS:LEADCITE states that citations are often omitted from the lead section as this information...
Click to read more »July 2012 (UTC) Comment: There are a lot of citations in the lead. Per WP:LEADCITE, it seems that these citations are redundant as the info is already backed...
Click to read more »of an article that is most likely to be challenged by visitors. See: WP:LEADCITE. Regards, RJH (talk) 14:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC) Fair enough, I've indicated...
Click to read more »already covered in the other sections (other than introduction) as WP:LEADCITE advises "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the...
Click to read more »since the WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize the rest of the article (WP:LEADCITE). I'd move the citations to appropriate locations within the body. done...
Click to read more »challenged, such as claims about "tuft of hair" and "Latin for curl". (See WP:LEADCITE.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC) Comment (GermanJoe) Oppose...
Click to read more »direct quotations. See WP:LEADCITE. Aa77zz (talk) 12:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC) I must admit, I was unaware of the WP:LEADCITE policy! The citations are...
Click to read more »sourced in the body would be challenged, are these really necessary per WP:LEADCITE?--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the support...
Click to read more »February 2024 (UTC) Great to see this here. Uncited quote in the lead. Per WP:LEADCITE: 'The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or...
Click to read more »consolidated to a single cite. I cleaned up the remainder consistent with WP:LEADCITE. The artifact of starting the cite tags with the "[15]" is a function of...
Click to read more »[2]" this already mentioned in the body, so no need for the lead per WP:LEADCITE I mean, I thought quotes need citations everywhere and claims needed to...
Click to read more »should be in the body and thus isn't needed in the lead at all per WP:LEADCITE. They're both from the university, one appears to be a dead version of...
Click to read more »not done Direct quotes should be cited immediately in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC) Dead links...
Click to read more »but if you add quotations to the lead they need a cite there too per WP:LEADCITE. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC) Fixed. Ironholds...
Click to read more »the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body..." (WP:LEADCITE). Dan56 (talk) 04:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC) Featured articles are supposed...
Click to read more »(talk) 23:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC) With all due respect, that's not what WP:LEADCITE says. I find this useful: "editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant...
Click to read more »(and believe me, they exist). Does the citation hurt anything? Per WP:LEADCITE "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors...
Click to read more »down in the body of the article. However, I was previously directed to WP:LEADCITE which says "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged...
Click to read more »paragraph does need at least one reference except for lead sections (WP:LEADCITE) and plot sections of shows, books, movies, TV episodes, concerts, and...
Click to read more »life, people lit bonfires around London" would be better cited per WP:LEADCITE. The lead says "Celebrating the fact that King James I had survived the...
Click to read more »automated MRT line in Singapore" any way to include this in the body per WP:LEADCITE? Fixed. Finished initial review. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 17:35...
Click to read more »Golden call me maybe? His work has been characterised as: I think MOS:LEADCITE would like a citation here, as we're implicitly saying that someone has...
Click to read more »necessary? The reference at the end of the lead can be removed, per WP:LEADCITE. All points addressed. As per the last point about the reference, that...
Click to read more »the name of the article? Fixed. Try to avoid refs in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE. The policy states that refs in the lead are determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »something new. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC) Support Comment This...
Click to read more »notice, but I feel this statement would still warrant citing under WP:LEADCITE. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Fixed. Polytope24 (talk)...
Click to read more »also think most of those citations in the lead could be removed per WP:LEADCITE.陣内Jinnai 23:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC) Sounds good; implemented all concerns...
Click to read more »are not fully supportive of what you're saying. Third, according to WP:LEADCITE: "Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations;...
Click to read more »'support' from me. There are two cites in the lead, should not be there per WP:LEADCITE as long as the facts are cited later. Gaultier does not use the hyphen...
Click to read more »in the lead. --Efe (talk) 15:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Care to read WP:LEADCITE? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC) "critics have compared...
Click to read more »2020 (UTC) Comments by John M Wolfson I'm surprised at the amount of LEADCITEs. They're certainly not prohibited by any guideline, but modern standard...
Click to read more »all aware of the two citation conventions. I was working off Wikipedia:LEADCITE; could you point out the location of a description of these alternate lead...
Click to read more »who is a living person. Given the high standard expected in BLPs, and WP:LEADCITE, I am concerned about there being no cites in the lead for the following:...
Click to read more »06:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC) Source review - spotchecks not done Per WP:LEADCITE, direct quotes should be cited in the lead, even if they're repeated in...
Click to read more »and support. I note that even when the "no refs" lead syle is used, WP:LEADCITE still requires refs for quotations, material likely to be challenged (usually...
Click to read more »Wagner himself called some of his later works, 'music dramas')". Per WP:LEADCITE: "direct quotations ... must be provided with an inline citation every...
Click to read more »Shouldn't Ashley's quote at the end of the 1st paragraph be cited? WP:LEADCITE suggests that "direct quotations [in the lead] should be supported by an...
Click to read more »spotchecks not done Quotes should be cited immediately in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC) Is there a page...
Click to read more »And the complete version of that quote is used (and cited) later. Per WP:LEADCITE: "The lead must conform to verifiability and other policies. The verifiability...
Click to read more »Editorofthewiki[citation needed] 19:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC) According to WP:LEADCITE, "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors...
Click to read more »*Yes, I have just found that guideline as well, the direct shortcut is WP:LEADCITE. It would be a matter then of determining what is likely to be contentious...
Click to read more »19 October 2009 (UTC) I've had it raised on a number of mine, but WP:LEADCITE seems flexible. Excellent work. I read it through, good work.--Wehwalt...
Click to read more »quotes, or is this an actual one-word quote? If its the later, then per WP:LEADCITE you need to add in-line attribution. Direct quote. Added the ref. — Crisco...
Click to read more »June 2018 (UTC) See WP:LEADCITE - things like quotations should be cited even in the lead That is a rather strict reading of LEADCITE, it says cites are neither...
Click to read more »Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC) This is addressed in WP:LEADCITE. Many great leads have no citations at all. Plasticup T/C 14:48, 10 July...
Click to read more »material. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC) Lede * As per WP:LEADCITE, there are no sources and that makes the lead section look clean. The same...
Click to read more »the lead also needs to be rid of most or not all of its citations per WP:LEADCITE.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC) Article (edit | visual edit...
Click to read more »and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 03:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC) WP:LEADCITE issues - several references in the lead either need to be removed/moved...
Click to read more »likely to be challenged by a reader encountering it the first time, see WP:LEADCITE. I don't think your lede is controversial in anyway, so I would argue that...
Click to read more »Claims like such should include citations since it is challengeable (See WP:LEADCITE). "prominent" or "common"? " MTV has refused to play two of the band's...
Click to read more »any tools. Done.--TaerkastUA (Talk) 10:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC) *per WP:LEADCITE, we don't need those extra citations in the intro paragraph. Several of...
Click to read more »dog", and "short-faced bears" coming from? It should be cited, per MOS:LEADCITE. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:31, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Another added point:...
Click to read more »article. I don't know why references in the lead would be removed, as per WP:LEADCITE (part of WP:LEAD) the lead has the same citation requirements as the rest...
Click to read more »without citations. Is there a reason for doing it differently here? See MOS:LEADCITE (The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case...
Click to read more »There is a citation in the lead for the injuries to the skull. Per WP:LEADCITE, I think this is something that could be better explained in the article...
Click to read more »citations in the lead have been properly removed in accordance with WP:LEADCITE. There is no actionable stability issue as I said and previous FARs concluded...
Click to read more »uncited (unless there is a contentious fact that needs it). Please see WP:LEADCITE for further informattion. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)...
Click to read more »uncited (unless there is a contentious fact that needs it). Please see WP:LEADCITE for further informattion. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)...
Click to read more »Story (2004)." Source? Source is in the main article below. As per WP:LEADCITE, citations in the Lead are minimal.Gprince007 (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2010...
Click to read more »citations in the lead even though it's not included in the body – see MOS:LEADCITE. Unfortunately, that one citation is the only way to prove it was the fifth...
Click to read more »(and linked to) in the article's main body. Yes, you have the choice - WP:LEADCITE. Johnbod (talk) 11:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC) 2. In the "Fakes and revised attributions"...
Click to read more »this as a controversial fact that warrants a citation in the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. Is that all you are looking for, a citation to back-up the naming of the...
Click to read more »a road" – quotations in the lead should have inline citations per MOS:LEADCITE (or rephrase into your own words) Guadeloupe – the first mention (in Preparations)...
Click to read more »their preference for no lead citations. Neither the FA criteria, nor MOS:LEADCITE, say "don't fully cite the lead" or "don't cite every lead sentence". But...
Click to read more »having the source the lede. --MASEM (t) 13:26, 25 September 2017 (UTC) MOS:LEADCITE is depressingly unhelpful as to whether citations in the lead are a good...
Click to read more »and Austria doesn't seem controversial or challengeable according to MOS:LEADCITE. "In January 1742 the Imperial election was held at Frankfurt, where Bavarian...
Click to read more »my understanding is that space-grant is not particularly important. MOS:LEADCITE has not been followed; many excess citations in the lead. ”Agricultural...
Click to read more »Scottdoesntknow (talk) 02:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC) Yikes! Please see WP:LEADCITE—citations in the lead are discouraged except in special cases. The density...
Click to read more »a line 18:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC) I am not seeing your point at WP:LEADCITE in terms a policy that citations clutter leads. Thanks for the weasel pointer...
Click to read more »include references if the material is cited later in the article (see WP:LEADCITE). Most of the information in the lead isn't controversial (such as the...
Click to read more »unsourced but follows from the rest of the list in the combined sense of MOS:LEADCITE and WP:CALC (or just as a direct calc from the system map ref 10). Yeah...
Click to read more »expanded. There are also refs in the lead, which is unnecessary as per WP:LEADCITE. Done. 16:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC) The third paragraph of the Gameplay...
Click to read more »While I doubt there will be a challenge, I thought it necessary. Per WP:LEADCITE: The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every...
Click to read more »doesn't have citations in the lede for consistency. See WP:LEADLENGTH, WP:LEADCITE. Some of your edits are appreciated though. Apologies, I'm unsure how to...
Click to read more »are my concerns: The lead contains refs which is unnecessary as per WP:LEADCITE if the information is cited in the body, which it is. Common terms and...
Click to read more »a line 18:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC) I am not seeing your point at WP:LEADCITE in terms a policy that citations clutter leads. Thanks for the weasel pointer...
Click to read more »the lead general so that citations in it would not be necessary, per WP:LEADCITE. All information in the lead section is now cited in other sections of...
Click to read more »a high-quality RS, but that cite itself seems to be unnecessary per WP:LEADCITE. Ref 2 has the wrong title this RS/N discussion does not lend me with confidence...
Click to read more »re-write in order to meet the "well written" part of the criteria. Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead doesn't need to be sourced and would be better off being merged...
Click to read more »the same information is fully sourced in the body of the article, per WP:LEADCITE. I recommend removing the redundant lead citations so the summary remains...
Click to read more »Most, if not all, of the citations in the lede should be removed per WP:LEADCITE. Those are the most glaring big picture issues I see. ~ HAL333 21:34, 25...
Click to read more »serious issues with sources. For formatting, the article does not follow MOS:LEADCITE and WP:INFOBOXCITE. There's a bare url (ref 101), and much of the "Notable...
Click to read more »information is in the body, references shoudn't go here (excepting WP:LEADCITE). Content summary "Meals and appetizers are discussed.[11][12]" Too short...
Click to read more »the brink of delisting, but the issues mentioned -- accessibility, WP:LEADCITE compliance, and overreliance on primary sources -- are far from insurmountable...
Click to read more »different schools of thought about redundancy of citations in the lead (see WP:LEADCITE) with the gist being that only controversial claims NEED to be cited. I...
Click to read more »if any of the material is challenged, citations will be added per MOS:LEADCITE. Popoki35 (talk) 14:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC) ScottishFinnishRadish, Min-Premuzi...
Click to read more »contribs) 20:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC) @FAdesdae378: and that is fine per MOS:LEADCITE. Everything in the lead is sourced in the main body. The lead does not...
Click to read more »here are my comments No citations please in the lead. WP:LEAD. Per WP:LEADCITE some claims need refs in lead. Quotes should always have cites directly...
Click to read more »04:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC) Lead Why the citation? In accordance with MOS:LEADCITE, I added that citation since this statement is not repeated anywhere in...
Click to read more »for all quotations." I think the idea is sort of like the idea behind WP:LEADCITE. However the point is moot for this example since the main article is not...
Click to read more »master of scholarly skills": as this is a quote it should be cited, per MOS:LEADCITE Well, I could, but I think "The necessity for citations in a lead should...
Click to read more »