Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The following presents a non-exhaustive list of sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed. This list summarizes prior consensus and consolidates links to the most in-depth and recent discussions from the reliable sources noticeboard and elsewhere on Wikipedia.
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.
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 .
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 ...
The perennial sources list is intended for sources that we've repeatedly identified actual problems with, and despite their concerning ownership (classification as generally reliable doesn't preclude WP:WEIGHT) the discussion to classify them here feels preemptive.
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 .
Reliable third-party sources should be the principal reference material for Wikipedia articles, whenever possible. These sources are up-to-date, written purposefully to inform about the subject they are being cited for, and released by a publisher with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. [ 2 ]
Discussions outside of the reliable sources noticeboard are not listed here, but they can still be listed as ordinary non-noticeboard discussions. Ordinary non-noticeboard discussions: List essential discussions located outside of the reliable sources noticeboard and its archives in chronological order. Use a section link for these discussions ...