Before posting, please check the archives and list of perennial sources for prior discussions of the source. If after reviewing, you feel a new post is warranted, please be sure to include the following information, if available: |
|
- Links to past discussion of the source on this board.
- Source. The book or web page being used as the source. For a book, include the author, title, publisher, page number, etc. For an online source, please include links. For example: [http://www.website.com/webpage.html].
- Article. The Wikipedia article(s) in which the source is being used. For example: [[Article name]].
- Content. The exact statement(s) in the article that the source supports. Please supply a diff, or put the content inside block quotes. For example: <blockquote>text</blockquote>. Many sources are reliable for statement "X", but unreliable for statement "Y".
In some cases, it can also be appropriate to start a general discussion about the likelihood that statements from a particular source are reliable or unreliable. If the discussion takes the form of a request for comment, a common format for writing the RfC question can be found here. Please be sure to include examples of editing disputes that show why you are seeking comment on the source. |
|
|
Additional notes:
- The guideline that most directly relates to whether a given source is reliable is Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
- It has an explanatory supplement at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, listing the outcomes of many consensus discussions at this noticeboard.
- The policy that most directly relates is: Verifiability.
- If your question is about whether material constitutes original research, please use the No original research notice board.
- If your question is about undue weight or other neutral point of view issues, please use the NPOV noticeboard.
- If an unreliable source is being over-used or spammed, consider the MediaWiki blacklist, where it can be added to the spam blacklist or a revert list for automated reversion of potential good-faith additions.
- Requests for comment for deprecation, or for blacklisting or classification as generally unreliable of sources that are widely used in articles, should be registered here using
{{rfc|prop}} . As usual with RfCs, consensus is assessed based on the weight of policy-based argument.
|
Sections older than 5 days archived by lowercase sigmabot III.
|
|