The template may also be used to highlight the questionable passage in the text:
"The moon is considered to have {{According to whom|water, cream cheese}} and potato salad." produces
"The moon is considered to have water, cream cheese[according to whom?] and potato salad."
When to use
This tag is for placement after mention of a vague, third-party claim that is not sourced, such as "considered", "noted as", "nicknamed", "lauded as the world's [best/largest/finest/etc.]", "labeled", and the like.
Use this tag when no specific examples of identifiable individuals or groups are named who could be used to verify the statements or beliefs that appear in the tagged passage of the article.
Do not use this tag for material that is already supported by an inline citation. If you want to know who holds that view, all you have to do is look at the source named at the end of the sentence or paragraph. It is not necessary to inquire "According to whom?" in that circumstance.
Alternatives
Sometimes, the offending statement should be made more specific by using in-text attribution to identify particular individuals who hold this position, and then either supplied with an inline citation showing that this person or group holds this position, or tagged as needing citation.
Extremely vague statements ("Alice Expert enjoys broad support") should normally be removed.
Unsourced statements that say or imply something controversial about a living person should be removed immediately.
Do not use this tag if naming the individuals who hold a position would be silly because of the number. Facts that are widely held should be asserted as simple facts. Do not use in-text attribution to imply that a widely held view is a minority position. Thus, we write simply that "The Earth is round", not "Scientists like Suren Ayvazyan, Teki Biçoku, Donald Canfield, Ricardo Cirera, Hartley T. Ferrar, Nicolae Frolov, Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain, Manuel Santillán (and about a million others) say that the Earth is round."
