Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For a source to be added to this list, editors generally expect two or more significant discussions about the source's reliability in the past, or an uninterrupted request for comment on the source's reliability that took place on the reliable sources noticeboard. For a discussion to be considered significant, most editors expect no fewer than ...
Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in the Wikipedia article. Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source or information that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable; editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible.
It cited Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales' view that Wikipedia may not be ideal as a source for all academic uses, and (as with other sources) suggests that at the least, one strength of Wikipedia is that it provides a good starting point for current information on a very wide range of topics.
Unless the source exercises editorial control, e-prints and conference abstracts should be considered to be self-published. The above questions can be used to consider the reliability of self-published scientific material. See the policy on self-published sources at WP:SPS. Many of them are also primary sources, which should be treated with ...
[g] Exercise caution when using such sources: if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent, reliable sources. [1] Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.
This means to cite all information you add to articles, to be sure all information is verifiable, and not to include original research in your additions. If you get known for being a reliable source--that is, for using authoritative sources published by reputable publishing houses, it is more likely that your edits will be trusted.
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 .
The age of a source affects its relevance and usefulness in research. In fast-changing areas, recent publications are important for the latest findings. Older sources may provide foundational knowledge or history, but one must consider their date. Understanding the context of both new and old sources is essential for clarity.