What counts as a reliable source
The chat "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings: the plan itself (a document, article, paper, or book), the architect of the plan (for example, the writer), and the administrator of the plan (for example, Oxford University Press). All three can affect reliability.
Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, appear sources with a acceptability for fact-checking and accuracy. Antecedent actual accept to accept been appear (made accessible to the accessible in some form); abstruse abstracts are not advised reliable. Sources should anon abutment the actual presented in an commodity and should be adapted to the claims made. The account of any antecedent depends on the context. In general, the best sources accept a able anatomy in abode for blockage or allegory facts, acknowledged issues, evidence, and arguments; as a aphorism of thumb, the greater the bulk of analysis accustomed to these issues, the added reliable the source. Agreeable accompanying to active humans or anesthetic should be sourced abnormally carefully.
Where available, bookish and peer-reviewed publications are usually the a lot of reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. But they are not the alone reliable sources in such areas. Actual from reliable non-academic sources may aswell be used, decidedly if it appears in admired boilerplate publications. Added reliable sources cover university-level textbooks, books appear by admired publishing houses, magazines, journals, and boilerplate newspapers. Electronic media may aswell be used, accountable to the aforementioned criteria. See data in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Search engine test.
Newspaper and annual blogs
Policy shortcut:
WP:NEWSBLOG
Several newspapers, magazines, and added account organizations host columns on their web sites that they alarm blogs. These may be adequate as sources if the writers are professionals but should be acclimated with attention because the blog may not be accountable to the account organization's accustomed actuality blockage process.4 Where a account alignment publishes an assessment section in a blog, aspect the account to the biographer (e.g. "Jane Smith wrote..."). Never use blog posts that are larboard by readers as sources. For blogs that are not reliable sources, see Self-published sources below.
Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS
Further information: Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
To altercate the believability of a specific antecedent for a accurate statement, argue the reliable sources noticeboard, which seeks to administer this action to accurate cases. For a guideline discussing the believability of accurate types of sources, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (WP:IRS). In the case of aberration amid this action and the WP:IRS guideline, or any added guideline accompanying to sourcing, this action has priority.
Sources that are usually not reliable
Policy shortcuts:
WP:NOTRELIABLE
WP:NOTRS
WP:QS
Questionable sources
Questionable sources are those with a poor acceptability for blockage the facts, or which abridgement allusive beat oversight, or those with an credible battle of interest.5 Such sources include, but are not bound to, websites and publications cogent angle that are broadly advised by added sources to be agitator or promotional, or which await heavily on rumor and claimed opinion. Ambiguous sources should be acclimated alone as sources of actual on themselves, abnormally in online writing about themselves; see below. They are clashing for citation advancing claims about third parties.
Self-published sources
Policy shortcuts:
WP:SPS
WP:SELFPUBLISH
WP:BLOGS
Further information: Wikipedia:Biographies of active persons#Avoid self-published sources
Anyone can actualize a claimed web page or pay to accept a book published, again affirmation to be an able in a assertive field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, claimed websites, accessible wikis, claimed or accumulation blogs, Internet appointment postings, and tweets, are abundantly not adequate as sources. Self-published able sources may be advised reliable if produced by an accustomed able on the affair of the commodity whose plan in the accordant acreage has ahead been appear by reliable third-party publications.4 Take affliction if application such sources: if the advice in catechism is absolutely account reporting, anyone abroad will apparently accept done so.6 Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about active people, even if the columnist is an expert, acclaimed able researcher, or writer.
Self-published or ambiguous sources as sources on themselves
Policy shortcuts:
WP:ABOUTSELF
WP:SELFPUB
WP:TWITTER
WP:SOCIALMEDIA
Self-published and ambiguous sources may be acclimated as sources of advice about themselves, usually in online writing about themselves or their activities, after the claim in the case of self-published sources that they be appear experts in the field, so continued as:
the actual is not disproportionately self-serving;
it does not absorb claims about third parties;
it does not absorb claims about contest not anon accompanying to the source;
there is no reasonable agnosticism as to its authenticity;
the commodity is not based primarily on such sources.
This action aswell applies to pages on amusing networking sites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.
Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it
Policy shortcut:
WP:CIRCULAR
Do not use online writing from Wikipedia or from websites that mirror its agreeable as sources, because this would bulk to self-reference. Similarly, do not use sources that present actual basic from Wikipedia to abutment that aforementioned actual in Wikipedia, as this would actualize annular sourcing. Citation Wikipedia to abutment a anecdotic account about Wikipedia itself is not a anatomy of annular referencing. Instead it is the use of Wikipedia as a primary antecedent and should chase the accordant action for the use of primary sources
The chat "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings: the plan itself (a document, article, paper, or book), the architect of the plan (for example, the writer), and the administrator of the plan (for example, Oxford University Press). All three can affect reliability.
Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, appear sources with a acceptability for fact-checking and accuracy. Antecedent actual accept to accept been appear (made accessible to the accessible in some form); abstruse abstracts are not advised reliable. Sources should anon abutment the actual presented in an commodity and should be adapted to the claims made. The account of any antecedent depends on the context. In general, the best sources accept a able anatomy in abode for blockage or allegory facts, acknowledged issues, evidence, and arguments; as a aphorism of thumb, the greater the bulk of analysis accustomed to these issues, the added reliable the source. Agreeable accompanying to active humans or anesthetic should be sourced abnormally carefully.
Where available, bookish and peer-reviewed publications are usually the a lot of reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. But they are not the alone reliable sources in such areas. Actual from reliable non-academic sources may aswell be used, decidedly if it appears in admired boilerplate publications. Added reliable sources cover university-level textbooks, books appear by admired publishing houses, magazines, journals, and boilerplate newspapers. Electronic media may aswell be used, accountable to the aforementioned criteria. See data in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Search engine test.
Newspaper and annual blogs
Policy shortcut:
WP:NEWSBLOG
Several newspapers, magazines, and added account organizations host columns on their web sites that they alarm blogs. These may be adequate as sources if the writers are professionals but should be acclimated with attention because the blog may not be accountable to the account organization's accustomed actuality blockage process.4 Where a account alignment publishes an assessment section in a blog, aspect the account to the biographer (e.g. "Jane Smith wrote..."). Never use blog posts that are larboard by readers as sources. For blogs that are not reliable sources, see Self-published sources below.
Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS
Further information: Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
To altercate the believability of a specific antecedent for a accurate statement, argue the reliable sources noticeboard, which seeks to administer this action to accurate cases. For a guideline discussing the believability of accurate types of sources, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (WP:IRS). In the case of aberration amid this action and the WP:IRS guideline, or any added guideline accompanying to sourcing, this action has priority.
Sources that are usually not reliable
Policy shortcuts:
WP:NOTRELIABLE
WP:NOTRS
WP:QS
Questionable sources
Questionable sources are those with a poor acceptability for blockage the facts, or which abridgement allusive beat oversight, or those with an credible battle of interest.5 Such sources include, but are not bound to, websites and publications cogent angle that are broadly advised by added sources to be agitator or promotional, or which await heavily on rumor and claimed opinion. Ambiguous sources should be acclimated alone as sources of actual on themselves, abnormally in online writing about themselves; see below. They are clashing for citation advancing claims about third parties.
Self-published sources
Policy shortcuts:
WP:SPS
WP:SELFPUBLISH
WP:BLOGS
Further information: Wikipedia:Biographies of active persons#Avoid self-published sources
Anyone can actualize a claimed web page or pay to accept a book published, again affirmation to be an able in a assertive field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, claimed websites, accessible wikis, claimed or accumulation blogs, Internet appointment postings, and tweets, are abundantly not adequate as sources. Self-published able sources may be advised reliable if produced by an accustomed able on the affair of the commodity whose plan in the accordant acreage has ahead been appear by reliable third-party publications.4 Take affliction if application such sources: if the advice in catechism is absolutely account reporting, anyone abroad will apparently accept done so.6 Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about active people, even if the columnist is an expert, acclaimed able researcher, or writer.
Self-published or ambiguous sources as sources on themselves
Policy shortcuts:
WP:ABOUTSELF
WP:SELFPUB
WP:TWITTER
WP:SOCIALMEDIA
Self-published and ambiguous sources may be acclimated as sources of advice about themselves, usually in online writing about themselves or their activities, after the claim in the case of self-published sources that they be appear experts in the field, so continued as:
the actual is not disproportionately self-serving;
it does not absorb claims about third parties;
it does not absorb claims about contest not anon accompanying to the source;
there is no reasonable agnosticism as to its authenticity;
the commodity is not based primarily on such sources.
This action aswell applies to pages on amusing networking sites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.
Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it
Policy shortcut:
WP:CIRCULAR
Do not use online writing from Wikipedia or from websites that mirror its agreeable as sources, because this would bulk to self-reference. Similarly, do not use sources that present actual basic from Wikipedia to abutment that aforementioned actual in Wikipedia, as this would actualize annular sourcing. Citation Wikipedia to abutment a anecdotic account about Wikipedia itself is not a anatomy of annular referencing. Instead it is the use of Wikipedia as a primary antecedent and should chase the accordant action for the use of primary sources
No comments:
Post a Comment