In my opinion, "Add reference" is better at least because it uses a verb and therefore functions as a "personal direction" towards the user.

Note that the CN check reuses the messages from the existing CN popup:

We should defeinitly consider the buttons in addReference:

Icons are not used in any other checks anymore and "No" doesn't really make sense when there is no prompt (other checks use "Dismiss")

I agree on unifying both addReference and CN copies. In fact, I think they should be the same suggestion, since both of them serve the same purpose. The only difference is that Citation needed indicates the issue was flagged by an editor, while Add reference does not. If that distinction is important, we could just show it as a supporting text in the card, similar to how Tone Check indicates that a suggestion was identified by the BERT model.

Change #1309163 had a related patch set uploaded (by Esanders; author: Esanders):

[mediawiki/extensions/VisualEditor@master] CitationNeededEditCheck: Match copy to addReference

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/1309163

Test wiki created on Patch demo by ESanders (WMF) using patch(es) linked to this task:
https://cda6b0938e.catalyst.wmcloud.org/wiki/Regent's Park?veaction=edit&ecenable=suggestions

@Esanders the unified cards look good. Just an observation about the copy. The copy Indicated by an editor feels too generic. What about one of the following alternatives?

• "Flagged by another editor"
• "Reported by another editor"

Also, should we include the date it was flagged?

In T431375#12106033, @bmartinezcalvo wrote:

@Esanders the unified cards look good. Just an observation about the copy. The copy Indicated by an editor feels too generic. What about one of the following alternatives?

• "Flagged by another editor"
• "Reported by another editor"

Also, should we include the date it was flagged?

Yes but it will require some refactoring so we should file a separate task.

Note: MONTH YEAR will only be included if it's been defined. In the future, it would be cool if we could automatically extract and present this context from the edit/diff that added the template.

Actually, in ruwiki such a thing was done a few months ago -- a bot added placement dates to all "problem templates", even those added ton of time ago. So maybe it's simpler to just run such a bot on major wikis (and disallow such templates without using subst).

In T431375#12106033, @bmartinezcalvo wrote:

@Esanders the unified cards look good. Just an observation about the copy. The copy Indicated by an editor feels too generic. What about one of the following alternatives?

• "Flagged by another editor"
• "Reported by another editor"

Also, should we include the date it was flagged?

I think "Reported by an editor" is the simplest language. (Strictly speaking it isn't always 'another' editor, it could be you, but 'an editor' seems just as good)

El T431375#12109259, @Esanders escribió:

I think "Reported by an editor" is the simplest language. (Strictly speaking it isn't always 'another' editor, it could be you, but 'an editor' seems just as good)

@Esanders ok, updated copy in the task description using Reported by an editor.

There's also a good idea from Femke at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:VisualEditor/Suggestion_Mode#Prompt_text_for_Add_a_reference -- Copying/Rephrasing slightly:

Often, when an editor finds a source for an uncited paragraph, it does not fully support the text. New editors often do not change the text to align with the citation they found.
Could the prompt that editors get in the Suggestion, include something like this?

• "Do not forget to update the text based on your new source"

I agree it would be very helpful to add this detail, as we really don't want newcomers to add references that aren't perfectly suitable. Alternative rephrasing ideas:
"[Please/Also] update the text based on the source you use."
"Make sure the article text is aligned with the source you add."

In T431375#12130388, @Quiddity wrote:

There's also a good idea from Femke at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:VisualEditor/Suggestion_Mode#Prompt_text_for_Add_a_reference -- Copying/Rephrasing slightly:

Often, when an editor finds a source for an uncited paragraph, it does not fully support the text. New editors often do not change the text to align with the citation they found.
Could the prompt that editors get in the Suggestion, include something like this?

• "Do not forget to update the text based on your new source"

I agree it would be very helpful to add this detail, as we really don't want newcomers to add references that aren't perfectly suitable. Alternative rephrasing ideas:
"[Please/Also] update the text based on the source you use."
"Make sure the article text is aligned with the source you add."

Great spot, @Femkemilene and thank you for surfacing this here, @Quiddity.

I've updated the description to include this propsal.

Change #1309163 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/extensions/VisualEditor@master] CitationNeededEditCheck: Match copy to addReference

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/1309163

Test wiki on Patch demo by ESanders (WMF) using patch(es) linked to this task was deleted:

https://cda6b0938e.catalyst.wmcloud.org/wiki/Regent's Park?veaction=edit&ecenable=suggestions