Misplaced Pages

:Reliable sources: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:19, 26 June 2007 view sourceCrum375 (talk | contribs)Administrators23,961 edits Rvt - we put emphasis on the publisher and the editorial oversight, not the author← Previous edit Revision as of 18:43, 26 June 2007 view source TimVickers (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users58,184 edits Revert, please explain why this large piece of the guideline should be deleted on the talk page, not in an edit summaryNext edit →
Line 50: Line 50:
===Self-published sources (online and paper)=== ===Self-published sources (online and paper)===
:''See ]'' :''See ]''

===Generally unacceptable sources===
{{shortcut|]|]}}
Some sources are generally unacceptable for use as references in Misplaced Pages:

* An '''anonymous source''' is an unnamed person or a work created by an unnamed author. Anonymous sources are not acceptable in Misplaced Pages, because we can't attribute the viewpoint to its author. Anonymous sources whose material is published by reliable secondary sources, such as ] in '']'', are acceptable, because Misplaced Pages's source in this case would be the newspaper, not the anonymous source. Similarly, anonymous sources may be used as secondary sources in historical contexts, as in '']'' or other, older texts on Misplaced Pages, but we have to cite a reliable source ''reporting'' on the primary source (e.g. a history-related book).

* An '''unpublished source''' is one that is not publicly available, or that has been distributed only through anonymous channels or forums, and for which a publisher cannot be identified. Unpublished sources may never be used as sources on Misplaced Pages.

*An '''obsolete source''' is one that is out-of-date, or has been officially withdrawn or deprecated by its author(s) or publisher. Editors of articles on fast-moving subjects such as law, science, or current events should ensure they use the latest sources.

* A '''confidential source''', i.e. those sources which are considered ''confidential'' by the originating publisher may hold uncertain authority, as the original cannot be used to validate the reference.

* A '''questionable source''' is one with no ''independent'' editorial oversight or fact-checking process, or with a poor reputation for fact-checking. This includes websites and publications that express political, religious, anti-religious, or racist views that are widely acknowledged as extremist. It also includes gossip columns, ], and sources that are entirely promotional in nature. ]s are generally also questionable sources because anyone can add to them and there is no guarantee that the information is verified. Questionable sources should usually not be used as sources except in articles about themselves; see ] of the policy.

*A '''self-published source''' is material, online or in print, that has been published by the author, or whose publisher is a vanity press, web hosting service, or other organization that provides little or no editorial oversight. The expression "self-published source" may also refer to the author of the material. Personal websites, blogs, Misplaced Pages, and messages on USENET and Internet message boards are considered self-published. With self-published sources, no independent entity stands between the author and publication; the material may not have been subject to any form of fact-checking, legal scrutiny, or peer review. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published material is usually not acceptable as a reliable source, with some ].

;Examples:
*], as anyone can add entries to it and they are not moderated or edited further;
*] results should never be cited in articles; they may, however, be useful in discussions ''about'' articles, on the talk page, in a ] or elsewhere;
*The ], ], ] and similar holy books are not reliable sources on history or science but are reliable sources on their respective religion and related subjects;
*] are very reliable when it comes to general information about the subject (e.g. where an organisation is seated), but not reliable at all when it comes to opinions (e.g. "it was an enormous hit"). Articles that rely solely on primary sources also require a secondary reliable source.
*Open ]s, including other language ]s and even articles in this Misplaced Pages (when you find any sourced information on another wiki, you can validate and use the same source);
*Apparently "scientific information" on commercial websites which are in fact advertisements, especially with ]s and related things ("]");
*] for anything more than basic info, as, like wikis, it is user-created and edited (see also ] for examples on where it is appropriate);
*Personal ]s and ]s, ] sites (such as ]), and discussion forums;
*] and ] postings;
*] should be avoided, as more reliable and scholarly sources can usually be found.


==Convenience links== ==Convenience links==

Revision as of 18:43, 26 June 2007

Blue tickThis page documents an English Misplaced Pages content guideline.
Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.		Shortcuts

Misplaced Pages articles should be based on reliable, published sources. This page is a guideline, not a policy, and is mandatory only insofar as it repeats material from policy pages. The relevant policies on sources are Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, and Misplaced Pages:No original research.

Misplaced Pages:Verifiability says that any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source, as do quotations, and the responsibility for finding a source lies with the person who adds or restores the material. Unsourced or poorly sourced edits may be challenged and removed at any time. Sometimes it is better to have no information than to have information without a source.

See Misplaced Pages:Verifiability/Noticeboard for queries about the reliability of particular sources; see Misplaced Pages talk:Verifiability for queries about the policy.

What is a reliable source?

Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand.

The reliability of a source depends on context; what is reliable in one topic may not be in another. A publication by a world-renowned mathematician may not be a reliable source on topics of biology. In general, an article should use the most reliable sources available to its editors.

Why use reliable sources?

Sources are used:

  • To support an assertion made in an article. Sources used in this manner should be directly referenced for the point that is being supported.
  • To give credit to the source, to avoid the appearance of plagiarism or copyright violations. See Misplaced Pages:Copyrights.

Using reliable sources assures the reader that what is being presented meets the Misplaced Pages standards for verifiability and originality. Accurate citation allows the reader to go to those sources and gives appropriate credit to the author of the work.

If all the sources for a given statement or topic are of low reliability, the material may not be suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages.

Aspects of reliability

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Verifiability

Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should be appropriate to the claims made.

Exceptional claims require exceptional sources

Shortcut See also: Misplaced Pages:Fringe theories

Certain red flags should prompt editors to examine the sources for a given claim.

  • Surprising or apparently important claims that are not widely known.
  • Surprising or apparently important reports of recent events not covered by reliable news media.
  • Reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, embarrassing, controversial, or against an interest they had previously defended.
  • Claims not supported or claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view in the relevant academic community. Be particularly careful when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.

Exceptional claims should be supported by multiple reliable sources, especially regarding scientific or medical topics, historical events, politically charged issues, and in biographies of living people.

Claims of consensus

Claims of consensus must be sourced. The claim that all or most scientists, scholars, or ministers hold a certain view requires a reliable source. Without it, opinions should be identified as those of particular, named sources.

Types of source material

See No original research: Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources

Biographies of living persons

See Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons

Self-published sources (online and paper)

See Verifiability: Self-published sources (online and paper)

Generally unacceptable sources

Shortcuts
  • ]
  • ]

Some sources are generally unacceptable for use as references in Misplaced Pages:

  • An anonymous source is an unnamed person or a work created by an unnamed author. Anonymous sources are not acceptable in Misplaced Pages, because we can't attribute the viewpoint to its author. Anonymous sources whose material is published by reliable secondary sources, such as Deep Throat in The Washington Post, are acceptable, because Misplaced Pages's source in this case would be the newspaper, not the anonymous source. Similarly, anonymous sources may be used as secondary sources in historical contexts, as in Beowulf or other, older texts on Misplaced Pages, but we have to cite a reliable source reporting on the primary source (e.g. a history-related book).
  • An unpublished source is one that is not publicly available, or that has been distributed only through anonymous channels or forums, and for which a publisher cannot be identified. Unpublished sources may never be used as sources on Misplaced Pages.
  • An obsolete source is one that is out-of-date, or has been officially withdrawn or deprecated by its author(s) or publisher. Editors of articles on fast-moving subjects such as law, science, or current events should ensure they use the latest sources.
  • A confidential source, i.e. those sources which are considered confidential by the originating publisher may hold uncertain authority, as the original cannot be used to validate the reference.
  • A questionable source is one with no independent editorial oversight or fact-checking process, or with a poor reputation for fact-checking. This includes websites and publications that express political, religious, anti-religious, or racist views that are widely acknowledged as extremist. It also includes gossip columns, tabloids, and sources that are entirely promotional in nature. Wikis are generally also questionable sources because anyone can add to them and there is no guarantee that the information is verified. Questionable sources should usually not be used as sources except in articles about themselves; see the self-publication provision of the policy.
  • A self-published source is material, online or in print, that has been published by the author, or whose publisher is a vanity press, web hosting service, or other organization that provides little or no editorial oversight. The expression "self-published source" may also refer to the author of the material. Personal websites, blogs, Misplaced Pages, and messages on USENET and Internet message boards are considered self-published. With self-published sources, no independent entity stands between the author and publication; the material may not have been subject to any form of fact-checking, legal scrutiny, or peer review. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published material is usually not acceptable as a reliable source, with some exceptions.
Examples
  • Urban Dictionary, as anyone can add entries to it and they are not moderated or edited further;
  • Google search results should never be cited in articles; they may, however, be useful in discussions about articles, on the talk page, in a deletion debate or elsewhere;
  • The Bible, Koran, Tanach and similar holy books are not reliable sources on history or science but are reliable sources on their respective religion and related subjects;
  • Primary sources are very reliable when it comes to general information about the subject (e.g. where an organisation is seated), but not reliable at all when it comes to opinions (e.g. "it was an enormous hit"). Articles that rely solely on primary sources also require a secondary reliable source.
  • Open wikis, including other language Wikipedias and even articles in this Misplaced Pages (when you find any sourced information on another wiki, you can validate and use the same source);
  • Apparently "scientific information" on commercial websites which are in fact advertisements, especially with medicines and related things ("pseudo-science");
  • IMDB for anything more than basic info, as, like wikis, it is user-created and edited (see also Misplaced Pages:IMDb for examples on where it is appropriate);
  • Personal web sites and blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace), and discussion forums;
  • Usenet and IRC postings;
  • SparkNotes should be avoided, as more reliable and scholarly sources can usually be found.

Convenience links

See Misplaced Pages:Convenience links#Reliability

Examples of statistics, subjects, and online sources

See Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/examples for examples of the use of statistical data, advice by subject area (including history, physical sciences, mathematics and medicine, law, Business and Commerce, popular culture and fiction), and the use of electronic or online sources.

See also

External links

Category: