Revision as of 13:01, 26 March 2008 editWasted Time R (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers74,036 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:13, 26 March 2008 edit undoWasted Time R (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers74,036 edits →Blogs as sourcesNext edit → | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
FYI in general, MSM blog entries are sometimes allowed as sources, see ] footnote 5. This has become common in this presidential election, e.g. MSNBC's FirstRead, the NY Times' The Caucus, and others of that ilk are okay to use. ] (]) 13:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | FYI in general, MSM blog entries are sometimes allowed as sources, see ] footnote 5. This has become common in this presidential election, e.g. MSNBC's FirstRead, the NY Times' The Caucus, and others of that ilk are okay to use. ] (]) 13:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Look at something like . It's a straight NYT news story, not an opinion piece, but it happens to be filed under their politics blog. Same with . There's no reason these can't be used as ]. That's the trend that footnote 5 is covering. I'm not saying this with respect to any particular edit you've made, just as a general FYI, because some editors are under the impression that nothing ever associated with a blog is allowed. ] (]) 13:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:13, 26 March 2008
Please sign your comments using four tildes ( |
Please respect etiquette and assume good faith. Also be nice and remain civil. |
kinda funny
you're in the national media bitching out Andy for POV. hi-larious... 72.0.180.2 (talk) 06:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Blogs as sources
FYI in general, MSM blog entries are sometimes allowed as sources, see WP:V footnote 5. This has become common in this presidential election, e.g. MSNBC's FirstRead, the NY Times' The Caucus, and others of that ilk are okay to use. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- Look at something like this. It's a straight NYT news story, not an opinion piece, but it happens to be filed under their politics blog. Same with this. There's no reason these can't be used as WP:RS. That's the trend that footnote 5 is covering. I'm not saying this with respect to any particular edit you've made, just as a general FYI, because some editors are under the impression that nothing ever associated with a blog is allowed. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)