Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is an essay on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines , as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community .
a list of banned sources that can never be used or should be removed on sight; a list of biased or unbiased sources; a list of sources that are guaranteed to be 100% correct regardless of context; a list of every source that has been discussed; a list of sources that have never been discussed, or whose reliability should be obvious to most editors
This essay relates to ways to find reliable sources, depending on the particular topic (see below: List of suggested sources). There are the general Wikipedia policies: WP:Reliable sources (WP:RS) - rules about determining reliable sources; WP:Verifiability (WP:V) - rules about writing verifiable text. WP:BLP - rules about living people, and ...
If the information is already in Wikipedia, even without a source, do not cite the children's source as a replacement or additional source. If the information is not in Wikipedia, citing the children's source may be acceptable. And even children's sources on children's subjects need to be reliable to be used in Wikipedia.
Inclusion on the list doesn't automatically mean the absolute truth is on these websites, so always be critical and compare information between different sources. The content of the subsections is alphabetically organized. Please add free online sources if you know some that are missing in this list, but try to keep it relevant and trustworthy.
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.
The sacred or original text(s) of the religion will always be primary sources, but any other acceptable source may be a secondary source in some articles. For example, the works of Thomas Aquinas are secondary sources for a Roman Catholic perspective on many topics, but are primary sources for Thomas Aquinas or Summa Theologica .
You should always try to use the best possible source, particularly when writing about living people. These are general guidelines, but the topic of reliable sources is a complicated one, and is impossible to fully cover here. You can find more information at Wikipedia:Verifiability and at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. There is also a list of ...