This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 400 | ← | Archive 402 | Archive 403 | Archive 404 | Archive 405 | Archive 406 | → | Archive 410 |
The Craig Murray article [1] had stuff about him claiming to have met the source for the DNC emails citing the Guardian and Snopes. Snopes responded to Daily Mail which was where Murray made most of his claims so its what most sources talk about. I added more information and cited The Hill and The Nation because they debunked Murrays claims in Daily Mail about when he said he met the source [2]
Cambial Yellowing removed it with the edit summary Recycled Daily Mail bits remain not RS
[3] and Rmv Daily Mail content
[4]
I restored it and said The Nation and The Hill are both RS, and a quote from The Nation debunking Daily Mail isnt recycling it
[5] and added Assanges comment on Daily Mail from The Hill
[6]
Cambial removed everything again but left The Hills response to Daily Mail, saying It’s still the deprecated Daily Mail. Seek consensus - highly unlikely - for an exception to that side-wide view
[7]
The Nation has their own editorial standards and is an RSP, and was reporting on and debunking Daily Mail content. Why would that make The Nation or their response to Murrays claims in Daily Mail deprecated? Or the Hill
If notable people say controversial things to fringe outlets or ones that arent reliable and that gets reported by outlets that are reliable, do we include that Softlemonades ( talk) 11:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
We don't trust quotes from deprecated sources. So, no - stop trying to use the Daily Mail - David Gerard ( talk) 14:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Last December, Murray, who is a close associate of WikiLeaks’s Julian Assange, told London’s Daily Mail a fanciful story: that he himself received a package containing the purloined e-mails “during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University.” Murray also claimed that “neither of the leaks came from the Russians.” But Murray’s secret rendezvous—which no one has ever corroborated, and for which Murray himself provided no details—supposedly happened in September 2016, long after WikiLeaks published the Guccifer 2.0–linked DNC e-mails, which surfaced months earlier.
According to The Nation, the alleged meeting "supposedly happened in September 2016, long after WikiLeaks published the Guccifer 2.0–linked DNC e-mails, which surfaced months earlier."Softlemonades ( talk) 15:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Reliable sources regularly cite things Wikipedia considers to be unreliable sources all the time; it's a basic way that journalism operates.(emphasis from Hawk)
If the WP:RS cites a non-RS in a way that is clearly skeptical or cautious, we have to be careful to reflect that in our wordingfits. When looking at the paragraph being quoted from The Nation, they are quite sceptical of it.
Last December, Murray,..., told London's Daily Mail a fanciful story, and
But Murray's secret rendevous - which no one has ever corroborated...supposedly happened in September 2016. If that content is to be included, then our own coverage of it would need to reflect the scepticism that's implied from the source. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 16:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
If that content is to be included, then our own coverage of it would need to reflect the scepticism that's implied from the sourceI agree and was trying to
reflect the scepticismwith the quote from The Nation. If the phrasing needed editing to make that stronger, that sounds like a good edit Softlemonades ( talk) 17:08, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
not the number of times that the information has been repeated elsewhereThe key information I added wasnt The Nation repeating what Murray said in Daily Mail, it was The Nation debunking Murrays claims Softlemonades ( talk) 16:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
If a given piece of information has originated from a deprecated source, then it's automatically unreliable for WikipediaThat seems to be an unworkable standard to me. Not only would that rule out a fair amount of content published by reliable journalistic sources, it would also have us discarding a not insubstantial amount of scholarly research. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 17:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
I was surprised to find no (substantial) mention of Ripley's Believe it or not in the archives, so I'll go ahead and ask. In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mihailo Tolotos, Ripley's was put forth as a WP:RS. Yea or nay? -- RoySmith (talk) 23:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Are any of the following 5 bulleted sources not reliable?
I am trying to add sources to
Jorge Otero Barreto (JOB) but 2 editors (btw, the first editor
WP:CANVASSED the second
here) object to my adding the 5 sources claiming the sources are not reliable.
The sources are:
The article
Jorge Otero Barreto already had other RS sources but, having stumbled upon more sources recently, I wanted to add them to the article.
The RS conflict started when I removed material
here that was irrelevant to the subject of the article as it talked about soldier
Robert L. Howard (RLH). The entry was, in fact,
WP:OR via
WP:SYNTH. Some back and forth reverts took place
here ,
here,
here and
here until an admin
here protected the article.
Discussion occurred, but the 2 editors (
User:Intothatdarkness and
User:Mztourist) are in denial, i.e., refuse to admit the 5 sources above are reliable. So it was until it became clear that the 2 editors had an "old ax to grind" and that what really bothered them was something else:
(1) the mere existence of the article, which Intothatdarkness have opposed before (
here), and
(2) the fact the statement "most decorated U.S. soldier" was in the article, which Mztourist had opposed before (
here).
Their old sentiments then carried over into our discussion as evident
here and
here.
Thus, although the initial issue for the reverts was the irrelevant material about RLH in an article about JOB, the 2 editors soon stated
here ("If the 'unsupported' claims about Barreto being "the most decorated U.S. soldier of the Vietnam War" are removed, there is NO NEED to mention Howard") and
here ("Intothat and I have made it very clear that all references to Howard can be removed from this page if the non reliably sourced claims that Barreto was the "most decorated soldier" of the Vietnam War are removed") that they would agree to the removal of the irrelevant RLH material from the article if the statement "the most decorated soldiers of the Vietnam war" was removed from the article as well. I had two problems with that:
(1) It's plain common sense that we
don't add irrelevant material to articles, and
(2) If there are RS sources to support content that was already in the article, there should be no reason for anyone to object to the addition of such sources.
IAE, I never agreed to that deal but, in the spirit of reaching a resolution, I looked for additional sources still, to share with the 2 editors. Once found (the 5 above) I shared them, but then they changed their tune to [
start arguing] that sources from "[[Newspaper#Geographical_scope_and_distribution|'local' papers]" weren't RSs because "
'local' papers aren't subject to the same level of verification or fact-checking." Up to that point our discussion had been mostly factual and carried in good faith, but at that juncture it turned purely argumentative, thus opinionated, thus POV, thus one of the main reasons I came to this Board.
IAE, as another way of seeking a resolution, I had also suggested that perhaps the problem was it should read "among the most decorated" (i.e, "one of the most decorated") here but the 2 editors wouldn't agree to that either. That is, both editors were determined not to allow into the article even something that said as little as JOB was "among the most decorated US soldiers in the Vietnam War" and even if it was supported by the 5 sources above because they felt the sources weren't RS source. Thus a reason I am also coming to this Board. The discussion is found here.
Thus, my question, are the 5 bulleted sources above NOT reliable sources?
Thanks, Mercy11 ( talk) 03:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Emma Loffhagen's 4 May Evening Standard article Matt Healy: The controversies and love life of The 1975 singer and Taylor Swift’s rumoured new man copies wholesale from Matty Healy. I've emailed the publisher to alert them of said plagiarism, but should its reliability be reviewed? Laun chba ller 20:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
While multiple pro-Putin disinformation sites are included in the deprecated sources list (Sputnik or RT as examples), I've noticed one glaring omission: EurAsia Daily (also called EA Daily), known for promoting disinformation and outright falsehoods that benefit the Russian government's positions, is not included and is used as a source on some articles. I believe that it should be deprecated, and have a laundry list of articles from other sources describing it as uncredible, listed below, with the specific examples of problems:
Sources describing information by EA Daily:
Sources describing EA Daily's pro-Putin position:
Overall, I think that the sheer breadth of coverage on the site's activities establishes a solid case for deprecating EA Daily. However, any further input on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
Mupper-san ( talk) 06:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Is the MIA (Marxists Internet Archive) Encyclopedia of Marxism a reliable/good source for the following text in Marietta Shaginyan?
She was one of the "fellow travelers" of the 1920s led by the Serapion Brotherhood and became one of the most prolific communist writers experimenting in satirico-fantastic fiction.
Link to page being cited:
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/s/h.htm#shaginyan-marietta
After looking around here (on RSN), there seem to be mixed opinions on the quality and reliability of this source. These bios in particular appear to be written by volunteers with no declared editorial process
[11], and this specific bio is quite short, but it seems to be reasonably accurate. I’ve not edited at Wikipedia for a while and am hoping to clean up this article to jump back in, so taking the very first source here to double check before embarking on a deep dive. Thanks in advance,
postleft
on mobile!
postleft
on mobile! 21:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
" China Anti-cult " and " Kaiwind " have spared no effort to carry out a large number of politically derogatory propaganda activities against groups disliked by the CCP authorities, especially Christian groups. At least it's a serious violation of Wikipedia's policy on WP:BLP.
Links to both sites are listed below:
ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 09:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The Encyclopedia of Latvia ( Latvian: Latvijas enciklopēdija) is the national encyclopedia of Latvia. An English version of this article has not yet been created. I'm not sure if this is a reliable source? This is the link to the electronic version of the encyclopedia and the home page of the website. ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 00:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The Ratlines (World War II) page heavily cites Unholy Trinity: The Vatican, The Nazis, and the Swiss Bankers by Mark Aarons and John Loftus as a source. Is this book reliable? John Loftus is a verified conspiracy theorist who has been called a fraud and a liar by academic historians. However, the book has been cited by many academic historians, like Michael Phayer (also cited in the article). Mucube ( talk • contribs) 22:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
There is a long review essay in the Journal of Modern History in 2010. [1]. It doesn't discuss Aarons and Loftus, but it does discuss two works by Phayer. On the question of ratlines, Patch says this:
It remains unclear whether a few rogue priests took advantage of the naivete of their colleagues in an enormous charitable organization or whether the Vatican had decided that SS and Ustasha officers were a valuable resource in the struggle against Communism. Phayer embraces the latter interpretation but provides no direct evidence that high officials at the Vatican knowingly assisted war criminals in their flight from justice.
Patch's overall tone (he devotes several pages to Phayer, there are other instances) suggests that Phayer is advancing an interpretation that has not been widely accepted in the academic community. This doesn't go so much to reliability (although there is a suggestion that the sourcing for Phayer's arguments is thin in places) as to dueness and weight. If a review essay says that about Phayer in 2010, we shouldn't use Aarons and Loftus (originally from 1991) for anything other than attributed opinion. Mackensen (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Is Daily Game a reliable source? — VORTEX 3427 ( Talk!) 10:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Discussions have been ongoing regarding the use of national health organization statements and the commentary provided by news organizations over at Endemic COVID-19. More participation would be appreciated. SmolBrane ( talk) 16:06, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Here is the source: [14]
Claim I am trying to cite is
Since 1994, Orvis has annually donated five percent of its pretax profits to conservation projects in cooperation with the Atlantic Salmon Federation, Nature Conservancy, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Ruffed Grouse Society, and Trout Unlimited among others.
in the article Orvis. Carpimaps ( talk) 12:10, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
I've been getting concerned about stuff like this. It reads like an extremely repetitive press release, and we're using it as an RS at Saurabh Khamar. Are we sure this isn't paid coverage? Valereee ( talk) 16:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
We know from WP:UGC (and by extension, MOS:FILMAUDIENCE) that user ratings published on sites like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes are not considered reliable. That much is clear, and these guidelines date back as far as 2013. What isn't as clear is how we treat this data when a significant number of reliable sources pick up on the scores and discuss them in detail. This is becoming increasingly common with newer films, where the disparity between critics and audiences (when it occurs) is getting called out.
Please see the discussion at WT:FILM#Audience reception: additional considerations. Thank you. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 07:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
It is a movie website under CCTV-6, and it is currently a relatively authoritative movie website in mainland China. Can it be considered a relatively reliable source if it does not involve politics or conflict/controversy with the Chinese government? ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 08:58, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Which of the following best describes Tweakers.net articles?
AFAIK Tweakers.net has not been discussed here. It has been cited a lot. [15] Concern was expressed here: Draft_talk:Privacy_Guides, but the declared COI editor and I did not agree. Although Tweakers site lists editors and appears to have editorial staff, I found a article like this [16] to be troubling because it was submitted by a person with obvious COI, and that person was extensively quoted; it was cited in Draft:Privacy_Guides. Without extensive review of the website, to me it appears similar to Reddit, or a large group blog. -- Yae4 ( talk) 17:45, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this is about [30]. Mind you: I don't dispute the claim, I dispute the source.
Let me be very clear: the regime would not have published that book if it didn't overtly support National-Communism. We don't use that book for the same reason we don't use Russian propaganda outlets, or North-Korean propaganda outlets. The Romanian National-Communist regime is dead, its propaganda machine is dead, and it is highly ridiculous to get offended by such reality. Many of the facts from that book could be accurate, but generally speaking National-Communism has heavily corrupted historiography and the social sciences. So, that renders the source unreliable. Since even works which had little to do with official ideology were censored of any ideologically inconvenient idea. That's what "totalitarianism" means: very thorough ideological censorship.
National-Communism destroyed my country and tyrannized my education. I didn't forget and I didn't forgive. Thus, I have no mercy for its ideological propaganda. tgeorgescu ( talk) 12:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Seems to be used across a wide range technology articles e.g. Zen 5, Template:AMD Ryzen Mobile 7040 series, Tesla Autopilot, iPhone 7, Nathan Drake (Uncharted), Music of Rocket League, Kiki Wolfkill. But afaik they have a reputation for a lot of their articles being based on rumours, others appearing to be a direct copy and paste from other sources ( [1]) - but others are direct interviews with the person in question ( [2]). They also appear to be considered unreliable and have been banned from some subreddits. - nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC) - nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:37, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Rocket League Radio: Players can now select specific soundtrack playlists, or choose all playlists
A deletion discussion is ongoing regarding the page 2007 Alderney UFO sighting which may be relevant to the topic of this board. Boynamedsue ( talk) 06:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
In Masalha book Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History, he makes it out that the Jewish people are not indigenous to the land a through Zionism, they colonised Palestinian land, this is obviously not a great source as yes while you may have critique over how Zionism led to the eventual creation of the State of Israel in how Zionism got the State of Israel created and as well all know critique is a good thing, it is dubious to say that Jewish people have colonised Palestinian land as there is plenty of archeological evidence which gives evidence of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, the book also makes it out to claim as a uniquely Palestinian City while neglecting the fact that it was under the Hasmonean Dynasty and is where a part of the Jewish revolt takes place, I give an extract from his book: The capital of Byzantine Palestine and of Palaestina Prima was Caesarea-Palaestina, 'Caesarea of Palestine' (von Suchem 1971: 7, 111; 2013; Gilman et al. 1905). This city was also called 'Caesarea by the Sea', or Caesarea Maritima. Since the creation of Israel in 1948 historians in the West have tended to avoid referring to the historic name of the Palestinian city, Caesarea-Palaestina, and use only the name Caesarea Maritima. This seems to imply that Caesarea was only a Palestinian City when in fact it fell under multitude of kingdoms, in fact the inhabitants to Caesarea up to 1948 only arrived in 630-700 CE in the Islamic conquest who claim the name of Palestinian. I shall provide you of a source where before this current ‘Palestinian City’ was established in fact the name Palestine in contrast to his book is not referring to a people when referred to academics but is the Greek name for Philistine which was eventually applied to the whole of the Land of Israel/Judea. The source I shall provide gives evidence that it was not a city belonging to a Palestinian People, but a Jewish City when it was established by King Herod. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/vie-caesarea There is also archeological evidence to back this up. While such Masalha’s book may have some legitimate criticisms of Zionism this extract in particular is twisted in a way but those who source it that seems to suggest Caesarea was a city belonging to a unique Palestinian People and that it had no Jewish history. As such I propose that source be removed from the Caesarea article as it seems to be twisted in this context to suggest that Jews have no history in Caesarea. Salandarianflag ( talk) 11:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Hatting lengthy exchange mainly between the two involved editors to give independent reviewers a chance to chime in. Abecedare ( talk) 15:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Is somebody seriously challenging the editor of Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies, published by Edinburgh University Press, and author of a number of widely cited books and articles on the history of Palestine and Israel? Personally find that to be evidence of either a CIR issue or a POV-pushing one, Masalha is a clearly reliable source. If he says something that other sources dispute, attribute them both. nableezy - 15:27, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Pre-empting the question about whether this source is relevant to the topic of the article we are discussing, see the index references of what is a 386-page book:
Caesarea Maritima (Qaysariah): 4, 15, 37–8, 40–1, 48, 65, 68, 86, 93–4, 96–103, 105–9, 111–13, 115–16, 120–2, 124–6, 128, 130, 137, 140–1, 146, 158–9, 162, 165–8, 170, 178, 187, 194–5, 197, 199, 368, 424n15, 426n6; capital of Palaestina Prima, 40, 93, 99, 102; first capital Jund Filastin, 96; home of the Founding Fathers of the Church, 100–3, 106–7; largest and most important city in Byzantine Palestine, 94, 102; library of, 101; seat of classical learning and cultural centre, 48, 94, 99–102
Caesarea‐Palaestina (‘Caesarea of Palestine’), 4, 37–8, 40–1, 68, 86, 93–4, 96–103, 105–9, 111, 115–16, 122, 124–6, 141, 162, 168, 195–7, 201–2, 217, 274, 368
Library of Caesarea‐Palaestina, 40–1, 93, 101–2, 121
See of Caesarea‐Palaestina, 106, 113, 116, 162
In other words, the topic of our article Caesarea Maritima represents a very significant component of this book, including the subject of a number of detailed sub-chapters. Onceinawhile ( talk) 20:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
It’s also factually incorrect to say Zed books is focused on the developing world. It is a leftist publisher, it is not focused on the developing world, nor are most of its titles.
The acquired Zed titles are a good strategic fit with Bloomsbury's existing publishing lists, whilst strengthening its offerings in African Studies and Development Studies. With the combined lists of Zed and I.B. Tauris, Bloomsbury is now a leader in academic Area Studies publishing. The Acquisition also enhances Bloomsbury's Politics and International Relations list… We are delighted to become the new guardian of the prestigious and progressive Zed list... Over 40 years, Zed has built up a unique presence in African and Development Studies, an area we wish to grow.
I recently removed several references to the Kings and Generals YouTube channel, and associated podcast, a couple of examples. I didn't think this was controversial, however Nederlandse Leeuw started a thread on my talk page that has me in two minds. So I thought I would bring it here for me input. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆ transmissions∆ ° co-ords° 12:57, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Although Kings and Generals itself most probably qualifies as a reliable source (and I have used it as such on occasion), it (unfortunately) is most likely not mentioned in enough other reliable sources ( WP:SIGCOV) to be notable enough for its own article.That happens all the time. A source may be reliable enough to be used as a source, but not notable enough for its own article. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 13:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
In the field of accuracy Kings and Generals make sure to research their videos by having the writers of each piece be also the ones who research it, as shown by them often answering questions in the video comments. In case of the artwork, the content creators present the art team with historical information so that they are able to make it in the most accurate manner possible. This can be confirmed by comparing it to depictions of clothing, armour and other in encyclopaedias and academic papers. (...)
Furthermore, it is important to mention the fact that Kings and Generals attempt to portray both sides in cases of wars. This may take place in a single video or by making several videos on the same topic from different points of view. An example for the latter would be their series on the first crusade, in which they give the western, Muslim and Byzantine sides of the conflict with their respective accents in the same manner and detail. (...) When a contradiction in sources is apparent, they specifically state all alternative interpretations while stating which is which in an attempt to give viewers all possible sides and allow them to weigh the elements for themselves. They also motivate their own chosen version of events with an explanation to why. (...)
Stemming from the previous point about accuracy, arises K&G’s biggest problem – their lack of sourcing. This is especially visible in cases where they compare contradicting sourcing or cite a researcher as these are usually the only moments when viewers get the opportunity to know where the information comes from. Besides them, there are no in-video sources provided in the form of annotations or pop-ups, and no sources in the video descriptions. (...) One other case where sources can be discovered are when their research team go into a video’s comments to answer questions or to give additional information or corrections to the video itself. (..)
Nor should young married men rashly set out on the journeywithout the consent of their spouses. This is evidently quoted from University of Pennsylvania emeritus professor Edward Peters (scholar), The First Crusade: "The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres" and Other Source Materials (1998) [1971]. I knew that the words "consent" and "spouses" would probably be an anachronism that wouldn't be used in 11th-century Latin, so I checked the original source, which is actually on Latin Wikisource, s:la:Epistolae_et_privilegia_(Urbanus_II)/5 ("CCX"), and it said:
Juvenibus etiam conjugatis providendum est ne temere tantum iter sine conniventia uxorum suarum aggrediantur.Being the Wikipedian-historian that I am, I went to create s:Translation:Pope Urban II's letter to Bologna to make it more accurate just for this sentence alone, which I translated as: Care must also be taken for young married men not to rashly embark on such a journey while turning a blind eye to their wives. "Wives" rather than "spouses", "not turning a blind eye to" rather than "without the consent of". That means: women didn't get a say, husbands didn't need their "consent" (approval, permission) to go on Crusade, they just need to arrange that they be looked after if they went on Crusade anyway.
Master of Arts - MA, Theory and Practice of Human Rights from the University of Essex. Link is here. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 15:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
bilibili.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Almost the same pattern as YouTube, per Wikipedia:RSPYT. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 20:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I am mediating at DRN and so am officially neutral. The question is about the reliability of the sources for a sentence, and therefore whether the sentence should be retained or deleted. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Should the sentence 'The combination of theanine and caffeine has been shown to promote faster simple reaction time, task switching, sustained attention, faster numeric working memory reaction time and improved sentence verification accuracy' be retained with all of its accompanying sources? [8]
Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content, as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information; for example, early lab results which don't hold in later clinical trials.(emphasis original). I don't think the sentence can stand, and given that (from the same guideline)
Determining weight of studies requires reliable secondary sources, and we don't have any of those, my reading of the guidelines and WP:UNDUEWEIGHT is that sentence needs to be deleted unless a review article or similar can be found. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 10:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
baijiahao.baidu.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Baijiahao (Chinese: 百家号) is a semi-user-generated, semi-official website. Officials (such as well-known Chinese media outlets) put their own content on it, but also allow users to upload their own content, similar to YouTube. The Chinese Wikipedia has reached a consensus that Baijiahao should be used with caution ( w:zh:Wikipedia:可靠来源/布告板/存档/2021年11月#本地宝/bendibao.com的來源是否可靠?, w:zh:Wikipedia:可靠来源/布告板/存档/2022年7月#百家号的來源是否可靠?, w:zh:Wikipedia:RSP) - only if it can be identified as a reputable media report or government, and there is no other choices (reviewed case by case). I think the English Wikipedia should also set filters to prevent new users from adding the source, as it is might be harder here to identify whether official content has been added or user-generated content has been added. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 20:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I decided to go a little deeper on this one. I selected the first 20 sources obtained via Special:LinkSearch/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/ that are located in the main space and created a table. Note that I am only analyzing here whether the source itself is generally considered authoritative - in general, a formal news organization with an editorial team (according to Wikipedia:NEWSORG). Whether what the source describes is factually correct or not is not analyzed:
Article on English Wikipedia | Inserted date | Inserted link | Author | Author authoritative? | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yang Zhuo | 03:58, 9 July 2017 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/po/feed/share?wfr=spider&for=pc&context=%7B | N/A | N/A | The quoter used the wrong format, which I can't personally fix or know about the original. |
Omnipotent Youth Society (album) | 06:53, 14 May 2020 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1560498795837818&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20201220183221/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1560498795837818&wfr=spider&for=pc |
民谣与诗 (Folklores and Poems) | According to 36kr, this media was initially Wang Jinhuan's personal account, and after 2016 he led a team of four people to reshape the account, which I personally regard as a tabloid, according to Wikipedia:NEWSORG, "news reporting from less-established outlets is generally considered less reliable for statements of fact", so I consider it generally unreliable. The article/entry was translated from the Chinese Wikipedia, however the Chinese Wikipedia now no longer contains the source. | |
Jinzhou Museum (Dalian) | 02:25, 22 March 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1563063373011796&wfr=spider&for=pc | 华之旅 (Travel of Hua) | According to the weibo account, the account was someone's personal account, not owned by any notable news medias. | |
Sampul | 00:30, 25 January 2020 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1564669932542581 Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180820154817/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1564669932542581 |
石亭资讯 (Shiting Information, Shiting is a town) | / | The publisher itself is not reliable, but this is supposed to be a republish of an official article originally published on WeChat public website, so I consider it semi-reliable. But as far as I know, no one would cite a reprinted news media post on Reddit as a source. |
Qixiong ruqun | 09:22, 2 December 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1567737333427313 | 煮酒君 (Mr. Boiling Wine) | Claiming to be an author, this person has only one best-selling book to his credit. Most of his content is self-published human-interest stories, which I personally regard as equivalent to blog posts. | |
Haining Library | 13:17, 21 August 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1567742628379056 | 红网 (Red Net) | Established in 2001, the media is supervised by the Hunan Provincial Government and has authority. So, this is clearly a regular, editorially-teamed news outlet. | |
Guangji Temple (Tianjin) | 07:49, 15 April 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180415190728/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc |
历今史往 (Past and Present History) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. In addition, it is worth noting that the user cancelled accounts on multiple other platforms. ( 1) | |
Shenzhou 2 | 07:49, 15 April 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc | 利刃号 (The Blade) | / | This is the most special one here. Unlike the examples above or below, this is a company-run account and you'll be able to find more specific information about the account's users, which I won't put out here specifically due to privacy concerns, and I've personally relaxed my standards to treat it as a magazine or think tank article for that reason. |
Jinan | 01:17, 28 November 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1570431935367773&wfr=spider&for=pc | 卧谈汇 (Sleeper Talk) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. Most of the stories have less than 10,000 reads.' | |
Chinese Basketball Association records | 19:55, 15 March 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1570530453984978 | 舌尖上的篮球 (Basketball on the tip of your tongue) | The publisher claims to be an "enthusiast in the field of sports" and has no other certification. | |
Fuxing (train) | 00:50, 11 June 2020 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1571173813981313&wfr=spider&for=pc | 央广网 ( China Central Television) | N/A | |
Climate of China | 17:40, 20 May 2022 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1572543886818701&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20170904105202/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1572543886818701&wfr=spider&for=pc |
最喜欢的大集合 (Big collection of favorites) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. The article itself is said to be reproduced from a toutiao account "民声天下" [People's voice], but the latter account is of the same nature. | |
Guqin | 18:30, 23 April 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1573446596541481&wfr=spider&for=pc | 百度百科 ( Baidu Baike) | It is the official account of Baidu Baike. Although Wikipedia:RSP has determined that Baidu Baike is not reliable, yet I am not here to discuss whether it is reliable but whether it is official, and if it is even not official and authoritative then IMO it is self-published content. | |
EM Legend | 16:40, 16 November 2020 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1573499948689774&wfr=spider&for=pc | 搏击视野 (Fight Vision) | Despite the credentials, I am unable to confirm the details of the owner of this account, who describes himself as a "free-fighting enthusiast" on his Weibo account. | |
Heimi Peak | 13:19, 28 October 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1577950275618301947&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20181028190255/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1577950275618301947&wfr=spider&for=pc |
忆光奇异 (Amnesia Light Fantastic) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
Qinglong Temple (Jishan County) | 01:08, 16 April 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1581896166617486533&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180416073610/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1581896166617486533&wfr=spider&for=pc |
插画集本 (Illustration Book) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
SNH48 Group | 09:58, 17 November 2022 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1582412401008570149&wfr=spider&for=pc | 上游新闻 (Upstream News) | Upstream News is the mobile news app of Chongqing Daily. | |
The Rap of China | 03:45, 27 April 2021 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1585828142784634075&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180316151945/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1585828142784634075&wfr=spider&for=pc |
娱乐劲爆 (Entertainment Explosion) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
Ningqiang County | 20:07, 23 August 2021 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1586095409831897090 | 中国日报网 ( China Daily) | N/A | |
List of township-level divisions of Hunan | 08:35, 15 March 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1588636661374860205&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180315195834/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1588636661374860205&wfr=spider&for=pc |
草木飞 (Grass and wood flying) | / | Similar to the Shiting case. The author seems to have simply reproduced the source of the "新巴陵" (New Baling) WeChat public number, which is the new media of Yueyang County Government. The problem is the same. |
Except for one invalid source, 14 of the 19 sources should be avoided, and even with the lowered criteria, there are still 11 sources that should not be used to describe a fact.
While it is true that YouTube was not given a filter in the previous RFC, Facebook was given a filter in the previous RFC. Considering that Baijiahao is also a platform that publishes a lot of text content rather than video content, a more appropriate comparison should be between Baijiahao and Facebook.
In addition, I am concerned about whether anyone is able to check the sources, and from the results in the table above, it appears that most of the content has never been effectively verified. Considering that most of the videos in YouTube are in English while the two platforms I listed are in Chinese - I think this would lead to YouTube links being more susceptible to verification, which is not the case with the latter two - I still stand by that filter is necessary. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 00:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Routesonline.com is used as a source in 807 articles on Wikipedia, almost universally for airline destinations according to this search. Is it reliable or not reliable as a source for airline destinations?
Just feel the need to point out that if the concern is that the site is insufficiently independent to be considered third-party, that there is nothing wrong with using first-party sources for verifying basic facts that need no interpretation ( WP:PSTS). oknazevad ( talk) 22:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to know if the following sources are reliable for this content:
In 2019, UFO seekers began visiting a Buddha statue on a hilltop outside of Nakhon Sawan, three hours north of Bangkok, who believe that they can telepathically communicate with Buddist aliens.
Sources:
Thanks! A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 19:28, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I ask because a user suggested the following sources be added to Steven Universe#Reception:
Pop Matters is also mentioned, but it is my understanding, from reading through previous discussions on this Noticeboard, it is considered a reliable source.
With that, I look forward to your comments on this before I add them (or not) to the Steven Universe page. Historyday01 ( talk) 23:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I've seen republicanchina.org cited in a few Wikipedia articles ( Mo Teh-hui, Alphonse Favier, Suicide Attack, Zhang Xuezhong (general), Operation Nekka order of battle), mostly related to China. Reading the front page of the website it seems to some sort of blog or self-published website with strong political opinions about Chinese history. Most of the content it's cited to support appears relatively innocuous, but I honestly don't think this website should be relied on for even basic facts. SilverStar54 ( talk) 16:00, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Heed the sons & ministers' agony and sorrow of our ancestors who died or lived through the Mongol, Manchu and Soviet-Chicom conquest and the Yongjia, Jingkang and Jiashen cataclysms !and
Note Barack Hussein Obama's half brother 'adopted' China or was adopted by communist China, setting an example for numerous Africans who came to China and worked as coyotes engaged in the operation of smuggling the illegal Africans to China. No idea what this is, but it shouldn't be used for referencing anything. I would suggest removing it on sight. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆ transmissions∆ ° co-ords° 19:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Asian Boss a YouTube channel is cited for a section in the Otto Warmbier article: [39]. Is this reliable? Jack Upland ( talk) 04:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
News story about the paper here. [40] The underlying paper appears to be this one, though I haven't yet found the full text. [41] This was in the context of AI evaluations of reliability, but it is still likely relevant to us. Adoring nanny ( talk) 22:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Do people think http://www.native-languages.org/ (run by a charitable organisation called Native Languages of the Americas) is a reliable source suitable for using for citations? It seems like, it has an extensive archive of material on various subjects that it's difficult to get references for (e.g. mythology, and of course languages, and things like the fact that a large number of Americans believe that one of their ancestors was a "Cherokee princess" when there never even was such a thing), they seem a bit one-horse but make an effort to run the site in a scholarly way and get things checked by native speakers of the languages involved if they can find any, and they got a good review from this site https://worldhistorycommons.org/native-languages-americas . Wombat140 ( talk) 13:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
We publish original writing by both native and non-native authors, but if the author is not native the article will be checked by a tribal member before being accepted for publication. There's no evidence I can see that original writing by native American authors is checked in any way before publication – even if it's written about a culture with which they have no particular connection. I would want to see more evidence of reliability before using this site. Caeciliusinhorto-public ( talk) 11:09, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
This source is cited at the WP:BLP Garnik Asatrian page. The source is supposed to support some pretty strong claims and assertions supposedly said by him in a 1998 interview [42]. I think we should be careful with interviews. What is said could mean something to one person and something else to another. Also, would it qualify as WP:RS, especially in a WP:BLP article such as this one? Thanks, - LouisAragon ( talk) 23:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello friends, I will name some of the sources in Javad Nazari's article below. Please, are they valid or not? While in the same article, which is related to Mr. Goldie, the English actor and composer, make a comparison so that at least the fairness option is observed. Such databases were documented in Javad Nazari's article imdb Google knowledge panel Amazon cinematographer Web movie set list Myanmar TV channel TV channel 21 Indian Movie Database Iranian film database Provincial news base Local newspaper Base of Iranian theater actors Radio Times etc... are these valid and reliable?! Thanks Miladtanhai ( talk) 17:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
In a discussion in Talk:2024 Republican Party presidential primaries#Revisiting Perry Johnson as a Major Declared Candidate Again, there is a debate as to if a specific candidate should be included as a major candidate. The consensus there is that the candidate needs 5 major and reliable news sources with national reach to talk about them explicitly for them to be included in the major candidate list. Two articles by Vande Bharat, a news source with no Wikipedia article which seems to focus on reporting about the news of Indian trains, was brought up talking about a specific candidate. These two articles are here and here. Every bone in my body wants to say this doesn't count as a major reliable source, but I would like to confirm this for good measure. Scu ba ( talk) 16:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I'd like to ask about the verifiability and applicability of these sources as pertains to the article in question.
For the purpose of context I'm providing them as they would be used in the article.
...
Thanks in advance. Nargothronde ( talk) 12:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
References
... the root of the evil is very deep, reaching as far as Athens. It is from there that the tree of evil, the bitter fruits of which the Greek Cypriot people are tasting today, is being fed and maintained and helped to grow and spread. In order to be absolutely clear I say that cadres of the military regime of Greece support and direct the activity of the EOKA terrorist organisation... It is also known, and an undeniable fact, that the opposition Cyprus press, which supports the criminal activity of EOKA and which has its sources of finance in Athens, received guidance and line from those in charge of the 2nd General Staff Office and the branch of the Greek Central Intelligence Services in Cyprus... Even the evil spirit which possesses the three defroced Cypriot Bishops who have caused a major crisis in the Church emanated from Athens... I have more than once so far felt and in some cases I have almost touched a hand invisibly extending from Athens and seeking to liquidate my human existence... I am not an appointed prefect or locum tenens of the Greek government in Cyprus, but an elected leader of a large section of Hellenism and I demand an appropriate conduct by the National Center towards me.
On Saturday, 13 July, a conference under the presidency of General Gizikis was held in Athens which lasted for many hours. It was attended by the Greek Chief of Staff of the armed forces, the Ambassador of Greece to Cyprus, the Commander of the National Guard and other officials, for the purpose of discussing the content of my letter. As was stated in a relevant communique issued at the end of this conference, it was to be reconvened on Monday, 15 July. The reference in the communique to a second conference was deceiving. For while on Monday I was waiting for a reply to my letter the reply came, and it was the coup.
On the night before the coup... more than 100 Greek army officers, dressed in civilian clothes, boarded an Olympic Airlines 727 for an unscheduled flight to Lefkoşa. The men were seen off by Colonel Michael Pylikhos, a top aide of Ioannidis. Another flight carrying an additional 100 men followed them 24 hours later.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials... People told by Makarios to lay down their guns, were shot by the National Guard.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
On the night before the coup... more than 100 Greek army officers, dressed in civilian clothes, boarded an Olympic Airlines 727 for an unscheduled flight to Lefkoşa. The men were seen off by Colonel Michael Pylikhos, a top aide of Ioannidis. Another flight carrying an additional 100 men followed them 24 hours later.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
Thousands of Turkish Cypriots were taken hostage after the invasion of Cyprus, Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street and the Turkish quarter of Limasol was burnt out by the National Guard
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
I ran through the streets and the soldiers were shooting all the time. I ran into a house and I saw a woman being attacked by soldiers. They were raping her. Then they shot her in front of my eyes
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
many women and children ... I saw myslef ... twenty dead children in the street and others crying out who were wounded
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
The site lists most of the world's volcanoes, including their type, location and when they last erupted. For example, the details of Mount Pavlof in Alaska. [43] But it's not clear to me if it belongs to a reliable source? -- ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 06:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 400 | ← | Archive 402 | Archive 403 | Archive 404 | Archive 405 | Archive 406 | → | Archive 410 |
The Craig Murray article [1] had stuff about him claiming to have met the source for the DNC emails citing the Guardian and Snopes. Snopes responded to Daily Mail which was where Murray made most of his claims so its what most sources talk about. I added more information and cited The Hill and The Nation because they debunked Murrays claims in Daily Mail about when he said he met the source [2]
Cambial Yellowing removed it with the edit summary Recycled Daily Mail bits remain not RS
[3] and Rmv Daily Mail content
[4]
I restored it and said The Nation and The Hill are both RS, and a quote from The Nation debunking Daily Mail isnt recycling it
[5] and added Assanges comment on Daily Mail from The Hill
[6]
Cambial removed everything again but left The Hills response to Daily Mail, saying It’s still the deprecated Daily Mail. Seek consensus - highly unlikely - for an exception to that side-wide view
[7]
The Nation has their own editorial standards and is an RSP, and was reporting on and debunking Daily Mail content. Why would that make The Nation or their response to Murrays claims in Daily Mail deprecated? Or the Hill
If notable people say controversial things to fringe outlets or ones that arent reliable and that gets reported by outlets that are reliable, do we include that Softlemonades ( talk) 11:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
We don't trust quotes from deprecated sources. So, no - stop trying to use the Daily Mail - David Gerard ( talk) 14:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Last December, Murray, who is a close associate of WikiLeaks’s Julian Assange, told London’s Daily Mail a fanciful story: that he himself received a package containing the purloined e-mails “during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University.” Murray also claimed that “neither of the leaks came from the Russians.” But Murray’s secret rendezvous—which no one has ever corroborated, and for which Murray himself provided no details—supposedly happened in September 2016, long after WikiLeaks published the Guccifer 2.0–linked DNC e-mails, which surfaced months earlier.
According to The Nation, the alleged meeting "supposedly happened in September 2016, long after WikiLeaks published the Guccifer 2.0–linked DNC e-mails, which surfaced months earlier."Softlemonades ( talk) 15:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Reliable sources regularly cite things Wikipedia considers to be unreliable sources all the time; it's a basic way that journalism operates.(emphasis from Hawk)
If the WP:RS cites a non-RS in a way that is clearly skeptical or cautious, we have to be careful to reflect that in our wordingfits. When looking at the paragraph being quoted from The Nation, they are quite sceptical of it.
Last December, Murray,..., told London's Daily Mail a fanciful story, and
But Murray's secret rendevous - which no one has ever corroborated...supposedly happened in September 2016. If that content is to be included, then our own coverage of it would need to reflect the scepticism that's implied from the source. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 16:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
If that content is to be included, then our own coverage of it would need to reflect the scepticism that's implied from the sourceI agree and was trying to
reflect the scepticismwith the quote from The Nation. If the phrasing needed editing to make that stronger, that sounds like a good edit Softlemonades ( talk) 17:08, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
not the number of times that the information has been repeated elsewhereThe key information I added wasnt The Nation repeating what Murray said in Daily Mail, it was The Nation debunking Murrays claims Softlemonades ( talk) 16:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
If a given piece of information has originated from a deprecated source, then it's automatically unreliable for WikipediaThat seems to be an unworkable standard to me. Not only would that rule out a fair amount of content published by reliable journalistic sources, it would also have us discarding a not insubstantial amount of scholarly research. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 17:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
I was surprised to find no (substantial) mention of Ripley's Believe it or not in the archives, so I'll go ahead and ask. In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mihailo Tolotos, Ripley's was put forth as a WP:RS. Yea or nay? -- RoySmith (talk) 23:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Are any of the following 5 bulleted sources not reliable?
I am trying to add sources to
Jorge Otero Barreto (JOB) but 2 editors (btw, the first editor
WP:CANVASSED the second
here) object to my adding the 5 sources claiming the sources are not reliable.
The sources are:
The article
Jorge Otero Barreto already had other RS sources but, having stumbled upon more sources recently, I wanted to add them to the article.
The RS conflict started when I removed material
here that was irrelevant to the subject of the article as it talked about soldier
Robert L. Howard (RLH). The entry was, in fact,
WP:OR via
WP:SYNTH. Some back and forth reverts took place
here ,
here,
here and
here until an admin
here protected the article.
Discussion occurred, but the 2 editors (
User:Intothatdarkness and
User:Mztourist) are in denial, i.e., refuse to admit the 5 sources above are reliable. So it was until it became clear that the 2 editors had an "old ax to grind" and that what really bothered them was something else:
(1) the mere existence of the article, which Intothatdarkness have opposed before (
here), and
(2) the fact the statement "most decorated U.S. soldier" was in the article, which Mztourist had opposed before (
here).
Their old sentiments then carried over into our discussion as evident
here and
here.
Thus, although the initial issue for the reverts was the irrelevant material about RLH in an article about JOB, the 2 editors soon stated
here ("If the 'unsupported' claims about Barreto being "the most decorated U.S. soldier of the Vietnam War" are removed, there is NO NEED to mention Howard") and
here ("Intothat and I have made it very clear that all references to Howard can be removed from this page if the non reliably sourced claims that Barreto was the "most decorated soldier" of the Vietnam War are removed") that they would agree to the removal of the irrelevant RLH material from the article if the statement "the most decorated soldiers of the Vietnam war" was removed from the article as well. I had two problems with that:
(1) It's plain common sense that we
don't add irrelevant material to articles, and
(2) If there are RS sources to support content that was already in the article, there should be no reason for anyone to object to the addition of such sources.
IAE, I never agreed to that deal but, in the spirit of reaching a resolution, I looked for additional sources still, to share with the 2 editors. Once found (the 5 above) I shared them, but then they changed their tune to [
start arguing] that sources from "[[Newspaper#Geographical_scope_and_distribution|'local' papers]" weren't RSs because "
'local' papers aren't subject to the same level of verification or fact-checking." Up to that point our discussion had been mostly factual and carried in good faith, but at that juncture it turned purely argumentative, thus opinionated, thus POV, thus one of the main reasons I came to this Board.
IAE, as another way of seeking a resolution, I had also suggested that perhaps the problem was it should read "among the most decorated" (i.e, "one of the most decorated") here but the 2 editors wouldn't agree to that either. That is, both editors were determined not to allow into the article even something that said as little as JOB was "among the most decorated US soldiers in the Vietnam War" and even if it was supported by the 5 sources above because they felt the sources weren't RS source. Thus a reason I am also coming to this Board. The discussion is found here.
Thus, my question, are the 5 bulleted sources above NOT reliable sources?
Thanks, Mercy11 ( talk) 03:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Emma Loffhagen's 4 May Evening Standard article Matt Healy: The controversies and love life of The 1975 singer and Taylor Swift’s rumoured new man copies wholesale from Matty Healy. I've emailed the publisher to alert them of said plagiarism, but should its reliability be reviewed? Laun chba ller 20:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
While multiple pro-Putin disinformation sites are included in the deprecated sources list (Sputnik or RT as examples), I've noticed one glaring omission: EurAsia Daily (also called EA Daily), known for promoting disinformation and outright falsehoods that benefit the Russian government's positions, is not included and is used as a source on some articles. I believe that it should be deprecated, and have a laundry list of articles from other sources describing it as uncredible, listed below, with the specific examples of problems:
Sources describing information by EA Daily:
Sources describing EA Daily's pro-Putin position:
Overall, I think that the sheer breadth of coverage on the site's activities establishes a solid case for deprecating EA Daily. However, any further input on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
Mupper-san ( talk) 06:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Is the MIA (Marxists Internet Archive) Encyclopedia of Marxism a reliable/good source for the following text in Marietta Shaginyan?
She was one of the "fellow travelers" of the 1920s led by the Serapion Brotherhood and became one of the most prolific communist writers experimenting in satirico-fantastic fiction.
Link to page being cited:
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/s/h.htm#shaginyan-marietta
After looking around here (on RSN), there seem to be mixed opinions on the quality and reliability of this source. These bios in particular appear to be written by volunteers with no declared editorial process
[11], and this specific bio is quite short, but it seems to be reasonably accurate. I’ve not edited at Wikipedia for a while and am hoping to clean up this article to jump back in, so taking the very first source here to double check before embarking on a deep dive. Thanks in advance,
postleft
on mobile!
postleft
on mobile! 21:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
" China Anti-cult " and " Kaiwind " have spared no effort to carry out a large number of politically derogatory propaganda activities against groups disliked by the CCP authorities, especially Christian groups. At least it's a serious violation of Wikipedia's policy on WP:BLP.
Links to both sites are listed below:
ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 09:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The Encyclopedia of Latvia ( Latvian: Latvijas enciklopēdija) is the national encyclopedia of Latvia. An English version of this article has not yet been created. I'm not sure if this is a reliable source? This is the link to the electronic version of the encyclopedia and the home page of the website. ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 00:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The Ratlines (World War II) page heavily cites Unholy Trinity: The Vatican, The Nazis, and the Swiss Bankers by Mark Aarons and John Loftus as a source. Is this book reliable? John Loftus is a verified conspiracy theorist who has been called a fraud and a liar by academic historians. However, the book has been cited by many academic historians, like Michael Phayer (also cited in the article). Mucube ( talk • contribs) 22:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
There is a long review essay in the Journal of Modern History in 2010. [1]. It doesn't discuss Aarons and Loftus, but it does discuss two works by Phayer. On the question of ratlines, Patch says this:
It remains unclear whether a few rogue priests took advantage of the naivete of their colleagues in an enormous charitable organization or whether the Vatican had decided that SS and Ustasha officers were a valuable resource in the struggle against Communism. Phayer embraces the latter interpretation but provides no direct evidence that high officials at the Vatican knowingly assisted war criminals in their flight from justice.
Patch's overall tone (he devotes several pages to Phayer, there are other instances) suggests that Phayer is advancing an interpretation that has not been widely accepted in the academic community. This doesn't go so much to reliability (although there is a suggestion that the sourcing for Phayer's arguments is thin in places) as to dueness and weight. If a review essay says that about Phayer in 2010, we shouldn't use Aarons and Loftus (originally from 1991) for anything other than attributed opinion. Mackensen (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Is Daily Game a reliable source? — VORTEX 3427 ( Talk!) 10:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Discussions have been ongoing regarding the use of national health organization statements and the commentary provided by news organizations over at Endemic COVID-19. More participation would be appreciated. SmolBrane ( talk) 16:06, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Here is the source: [14]
Claim I am trying to cite is
Since 1994, Orvis has annually donated five percent of its pretax profits to conservation projects in cooperation with the Atlantic Salmon Federation, Nature Conservancy, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Ruffed Grouse Society, and Trout Unlimited among others.
in the article Orvis. Carpimaps ( talk) 12:10, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
I've been getting concerned about stuff like this. It reads like an extremely repetitive press release, and we're using it as an RS at Saurabh Khamar. Are we sure this isn't paid coverage? Valereee ( talk) 16:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
We know from WP:UGC (and by extension, MOS:FILMAUDIENCE) that user ratings published on sites like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes are not considered reliable. That much is clear, and these guidelines date back as far as 2013. What isn't as clear is how we treat this data when a significant number of reliable sources pick up on the scores and discuss them in detail. This is becoming increasingly common with newer films, where the disparity between critics and audiences (when it occurs) is getting called out.
Please see the discussion at WT:FILM#Audience reception: additional considerations. Thank you. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 07:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
It is a movie website under CCTV-6, and it is currently a relatively authoritative movie website in mainland China. Can it be considered a relatively reliable source if it does not involve politics or conflict/controversy with the Chinese government? ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 08:58, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Which of the following best describes Tweakers.net articles?
AFAIK Tweakers.net has not been discussed here. It has been cited a lot. [15] Concern was expressed here: Draft_talk:Privacy_Guides, but the declared COI editor and I did not agree. Although Tweakers site lists editors and appears to have editorial staff, I found a article like this [16] to be troubling because it was submitted by a person with obvious COI, and that person was extensively quoted; it was cited in Draft:Privacy_Guides. Without extensive review of the website, to me it appears similar to Reddit, or a large group blog. -- Yae4 ( talk) 17:45, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this is about [30]. Mind you: I don't dispute the claim, I dispute the source.
Let me be very clear: the regime would not have published that book if it didn't overtly support National-Communism. We don't use that book for the same reason we don't use Russian propaganda outlets, or North-Korean propaganda outlets. The Romanian National-Communist regime is dead, its propaganda machine is dead, and it is highly ridiculous to get offended by such reality. Many of the facts from that book could be accurate, but generally speaking National-Communism has heavily corrupted historiography and the social sciences. So, that renders the source unreliable. Since even works which had little to do with official ideology were censored of any ideologically inconvenient idea. That's what "totalitarianism" means: very thorough ideological censorship.
National-Communism destroyed my country and tyrannized my education. I didn't forget and I didn't forgive. Thus, I have no mercy for its ideological propaganda. tgeorgescu ( talk) 12:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Seems to be used across a wide range technology articles e.g. Zen 5, Template:AMD Ryzen Mobile 7040 series, Tesla Autopilot, iPhone 7, Nathan Drake (Uncharted), Music of Rocket League, Kiki Wolfkill. But afaik they have a reputation for a lot of their articles being based on rumours, others appearing to be a direct copy and paste from other sources ( [1]) - but others are direct interviews with the person in question ( [2]). They also appear to be considered unreliable and have been banned from some subreddits. - nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC) - nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- nathanielcwm ( talk) 16:37, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Rocket League Radio: Players can now select specific soundtrack playlists, or choose all playlists
A deletion discussion is ongoing regarding the page 2007 Alderney UFO sighting which may be relevant to the topic of this board. Boynamedsue ( talk) 06:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
In Masalha book Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History, he makes it out that the Jewish people are not indigenous to the land a through Zionism, they colonised Palestinian land, this is obviously not a great source as yes while you may have critique over how Zionism led to the eventual creation of the State of Israel in how Zionism got the State of Israel created and as well all know critique is a good thing, it is dubious to say that Jewish people have colonised Palestinian land as there is plenty of archeological evidence which gives evidence of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, the book also makes it out to claim as a uniquely Palestinian City while neglecting the fact that it was under the Hasmonean Dynasty and is where a part of the Jewish revolt takes place, I give an extract from his book: The capital of Byzantine Palestine and of Palaestina Prima was Caesarea-Palaestina, 'Caesarea of Palestine' (von Suchem 1971: 7, 111; 2013; Gilman et al. 1905). This city was also called 'Caesarea by the Sea', or Caesarea Maritima. Since the creation of Israel in 1948 historians in the West have tended to avoid referring to the historic name of the Palestinian city, Caesarea-Palaestina, and use only the name Caesarea Maritima. This seems to imply that Caesarea was only a Palestinian City when in fact it fell under multitude of kingdoms, in fact the inhabitants to Caesarea up to 1948 only arrived in 630-700 CE in the Islamic conquest who claim the name of Palestinian. I shall provide you of a source where before this current ‘Palestinian City’ was established in fact the name Palestine in contrast to his book is not referring to a people when referred to academics but is the Greek name for Philistine which was eventually applied to the whole of the Land of Israel/Judea. The source I shall provide gives evidence that it was not a city belonging to a Palestinian People, but a Jewish City when it was established by King Herod. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/vie-caesarea There is also archeological evidence to back this up. While such Masalha’s book may have some legitimate criticisms of Zionism this extract in particular is twisted in a way but those who source it that seems to suggest Caesarea was a city belonging to a unique Palestinian People and that it had no Jewish history. As such I propose that source be removed from the Caesarea article as it seems to be twisted in this context to suggest that Jews have no history in Caesarea. Salandarianflag ( talk) 11:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Hatting lengthy exchange mainly between the two involved editors to give independent reviewers a chance to chime in. Abecedare ( talk) 15:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Is somebody seriously challenging the editor of Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies, published by Edinburgh University Press, and author of a number of widely cited books and articles on the history of Palestine and Israel? Personally find that to be evidence of either a CIR issue or a POV-pushing one, Masalha is a clearly reliable source. If he says something that other sources dispute, attribute them both. nableezy - 15:27, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Pre-empting the question about whether this source is relevant to the topic of the article we are discussing, see the index references of what is a 386-page book:
Caesarea Maritima (Qaysariah): 4, 15, 37–8, 40–1, 48, 65, 68, 86, 93–4, 96–103, 105–9, 111–13, 115–16, 120–2, 124–6, 128, 130, 137, 140–1, 146, 158–9, 162, 165–8, 170, 178, 187, 194–5, 197, 199, 368, 424n15, 426n6; capital of Palaestina Prima, 40, 93, 99, 102; first capital Jund Filastin, 96; home of the Founding Fathers of the Church, 100–3, 106–7; largest and most important city in Byzantine Palestine, 94, 102; library of, 101; seat of classical learning and cultural centre, 48, 94, 99–102
Caesarea‐Palaestina (‘Caesarea of Palestine’), 4, 37–8, 40–1, 68, 86, 93–4, 96–103, 105–9, 111, 115–16, 122, 124–6, 141, 162, 168, 195–7, 201–2, 217, 274, 368
Library of Caesarea‐Palaestina, 40–1, 93, 101–2, 121
See of Caesarea‐Palaestina, 106, 113, 116, 162
In other words, the topic of our article Caesarea Maritima represents a very significant component of this book, including the subject of a number of detailed sub-chapters. Onceinawhile ( talk) 20:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
It’s also factually incorrect to say Zed books is focused on the developing world. It is a leftist publisher, it is not focused on the developing world, nor are most of its titles.
The acquired Zed titles are a good strategic fit with Bloomsbury's existing publishing lists, whilst strengthening its offerings in African Studies and Development Studies. With the combined lists of Zed and I.B. Tauris, Bloomsbury is now a leader in academic Area Studies publishing. The Acquisition also enhances Bloomsbury's Politics and International Relations list… We are delighted to become the new guardian of the prestigious and progressive Zed list... Over 40 years, Zed has built up a unique presence in African and Development Studies, an area we wish to grow.
I recently removed several references to the Kings and Generals YouTube channel, and associated podcast, a couple of examples. I didn't think this was controversial, however Nederlandse Leeuw started a thread on my talk page that has me in two minds. So I thought I would bring it here for me input. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆ transmissions∆ ° co-ords° 12:57, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Although Kings and Generals itself most probably qualifies as a reliable source (and I have used it as such on occasion), it (unfortunately) is most likely not mentioned in enough other reliable sources ( WP:SIGCOV) to be notable enough for its own article.That happens all the time. A source may be reliable enough to be used as a source, but not notable enough for its own article. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 13:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
In the field of accuracy Kings and Generals make sure to research their videos by having the writers of each piece be also the ones who research it, as shown by them often answering questions in the video comments. In case of the artwork, the content creators present the art team with historical information so that they are able to make it in the most accurate manner possible. This can be confirmed by comparing it to depictions of clothing, armour and other in encyclopaedias and academic papers. (...)
Furthermore, it is important to mention the fact that Kings and Generals attempt to portray both sides in cases of wars. This may take place in a single video or by making several videos on the same topic from different points of view. An example for the latter would be their series on the first crusade, in which they give the western, Muslim and Byzantine sides of the conflict with their respective accents in the same manner and detail. (...) When a contradiction in sources is apparent, they specifically state all alternative interpretations while stating which is which in an attempt to give viewers all possible sides and allow them to weigh the elements for themselves. They also motivate their own chosen version of events with an explanation to why. (...)
Stemming from the previous point about accuracy, arises K&G’s biggest problem – their lack of sourcing. This is especially visible in cases where they compare contradicting sourcing or cite a researcher as these are usually the only moments when viewers get the opportunity to know where the information comes from. Besides them, there are no in-video sources provided in the form of annotations or pop-ups, and no sources in the video descriptions. (...) One other case where sources can be discovered are when their research team go into a video’s comments to answer questions or to give additional information or corrections to the video itself. (..)
Nor should young married men rashly set out on the journeywithout the consent of their spouses. This is evidently quoted from University of Pennsylvania emeritus professor Edward Peters (scholar), The First Crusade: "The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres" and Other Source Materials (1998) [1971]. I knew that the words "consent" and "spouses" would probably be an anachronism that wouldn't be used in 11th-century Latin, so I checked the original source, which is actually on Latin Wikisource, s:la:Epistolae_et_privilegia_(Urbanus_II)/5 ("CCX"), and it said:
Juvenibus etiam conjugatis providendum est ne temere tantum iter sine conniventia uxorum suarum aggrediantur.Being the Wikipedian-historian that I am, I went to create s:Translation:Pope Urban II's letter to Bologna to make it more accurate just for this sentence alone, which I translated as: Care must also be taken for young married men not to rashly embark on such a journey while turning a blind eye to their wives. "Wives" rather than "spouses", "not turning a blind eye to" rather than "without the consent of". That means: women didn't get a say, husbands didn't need their "consent" (approval, permission) to go on Crusade, they just need to arrange that they be looked after if they went on Crusade anyway.
Master of Arts - MA, Theory and Practice of Human Rights from the University of Essex. Link is here. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 15:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
bilibili.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Almost the same pattern as YouTube, per Wikipedia:RSPYT. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 20:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I am mediating at DRN and so am officially neutral. The question is about the reliability of the sources for a sentence, and therefore whether the sentence should be retained or deleted. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Should the sentence 'The combination of theanine and caffeine has been shown to promote faster simple reaction time, task switching, sustained attention, faster numeric working memory reaction time and improved sentence verification accuracy' be retained with all of its accompanying sources? [8]
Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content, as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information; for example, early lab results which don't hold in later clinical trials.(emphasis original). I don't think the sentence can stand, and given that (from the same guideline)
Determining weight of studies requires reliable secondary sources, and we don't have any of those, my reading of the guidelines and WP:UNDUEWEIGHT is that sentence needs to be deleted unless a review article or similar can be found. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 10:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
baijiahao.baidu.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Baijiahao (Chinese: 百家号) is a semi-user-generated, semi-official website. Officials (such as well-known Chinese media outlets) put their own content on it, but also allow users to upload their own content, similar to YouTube. The Chinese Wikipedia has reached a consensus that Baijiahao should be used with caution ( w:zh:Wikipedia:可靠来源/布告板/存档/2021年11月#本地宝/bendibao.com的來源是否可靠?, w:zh:Wikipedia:可靠来源/布告板/存档/2022年7月#百家号的來源是否可靠?, w:zh:Wikipedia:RSP) - only if it can be identified as a reputable media report or government, and there is no other choices (reviewed case by case). I think the English Wikipedia should also set filters to prevent new users from adding the source, as it is might be harder here to identify whether official content has been added or user-generated content has been added. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 20:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I decided to go a little deeper on this one. I selected the first 20 sources obtained via Special:LinkSearch/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/ that are located in the main space and created a table. Note that I am only analyzing here whether the source itself is generally considered authoritative - in general, a formal news organization with an editorial team (according to Wikipedia:NEWSORG). Whether what the source describes is factually correct or not is not analyzed:
Article on English Wikipedia | Inserted date | Inserted link | Author | Author authoritative? | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yang Zhuo | 03:58, 9 July 2017 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/po/feed/share?wfr=spider&for=pc&context=%7B | N/A | N/A | The quoter used the wrong format, which I can't personally fix or know about the original. |
Omnipotent Youth Society (album) | 06:53, 14 May 2020 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1560498795837818&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20201220183221/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1560498795837818&wfr=spider&for=pc |
民谣与诗 (Folklores and Poems) | According to 36kr, this media was initially Wang Jinhuan's personal account, and after 2016 he led a team of four people to reshape the account, which I personally regard as a tabloid, according to Wikipedia:NEWSORG, "news reporting from less-established outlets is generally considered less reliable for statements of fact", so I consider it generally unreliable. The article/entry was translated from the Chinese Wikipedia, however the Chinese Wikipedia now no longer contains the source. | |
Jinzhou Museum (Dalian) | 02:25, 22 March 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1563063373011796&wfr=spider&for=pc | 华之旅 (Travel of Hua) | According to the weibo account, the account was someone's personal account, not owned by any notable news medias. | |
Sampul | 00:30, 25 January 2020 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1564669932542581 Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180820154817/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1564669932542581 |
石亭资讯 (Shiting Information, Shiting is a town) | / | The publisher itself is not reliable, but this is supposed to be a republish of an official article originally published on WeChat public website, so I consider it semi-reliable. But as far as I know, no one would cite a reprinted news media post on Reddit as a source. |
Qixiong ruqun | 09:22, 2 December 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1567737333427313 | 煮酒君 (Mr. Boiling Wine) | Claiming to be an author, this person has only one best-selling book to his credit. Most of his content is self-published human-interest stories, which I personally regard as equivalent to blog posts. | |
Haining Library | 13:17, 21 August 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1567742628379056 | 红网 (Red Net) | Established in 2001, the media is supervised by the Hunan Provincial Government and has authority. So, this is clearly a regular, editorially-teamed news outlet. | |
Guangji Temple (Tianjin) | 07:49, 15 April 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180415190728/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc |
历今史往 (Past and Present History) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. In addition, it is worth noting that the user cancelled accounts on multiple other platforms. ( 1) | |
Shenzhou 2 | 07:49, 15 April 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1568935856506687&wfr=spider&for=pc | 利刃号 (The Blade) | / | This is the most special one here. Unlike the examples above or below, this is a company-run account and you'll be able to find more specific information about the account's users, which I won't put out here specifically due to privacy concerns, and I've personally relaxed my standards to treat it as a magazine or think tank article for that reason. |
Jinan | 01:17, 28 November 2018 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1570431935367773&wfr=spider&for=pc | 卧谈汇 (Sleeper Talk) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. Most of the stories have less than 10,000 reads.' | |
Chinese Basketball Association records | 19:55, 15 March 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1570530453984978 | 舌尖上的篮球 (Basketball on the tip of your tongue) | The publisher claims to be an "enthusiast in the field of sports" and has no other certification. | |
Fuxing (train) | 00:50, 11 June 2020 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1571173813981313&wfr=spider&for=pc | 央广网 ( China Central Television) | N/A | |
Climate of China | 17:40, 20 May 2022 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1572543886818701&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20170904105202/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1572543886818701&wfr=spider&for=pc |
最喜欢的大集合 (Big collection of favorites) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. The article itself is said to be reproduced from a toutiao account "民声天下" [People's voice], but the latter account is of the same nature. | |
Guqin | 18:30, 23 April 2019 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1573446596541481&wfr=spider&for=pc | 百度百科 ( Baidu Baike) | It is the official account of Baidu Baike. Although Wikipedia:RSP has determined that Baidu Baike is not reliable, yet I am not here to discuss whether it is reliable but whether it is official, and if it is even not official and authoritative then IMO it is self-published content. | |
EM Legend | 16:40, 16 November 2020 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1573499948689774&wfr=spider&for=pc | 搏击视野 (Fight Vision) | Despite the credentials, I am unable to confirm the details of the owner of this account, who describes himself as a "free-fighting enthusiast" on his Weibo account. | |
Heimi Peak | 13:19, 28 October 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1577950275618301947&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20181028190255/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1577950275618301947&wfr=spider&for=pc |
忆光奇异 (Amnesia Light Fantastic) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
Qinglong Temple (Jishan County) | 01:08, 16 April 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1581896166617486533&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180416073610/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1581896166617486533&wfr=spider&for=pc |
插画集本 (Illustration Book) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
SNH48 Group | 09:58, 17 November 2022 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1582412401008570149&wfr=spider&for=pc | 上游新闻 (Upstream News) | Upstream News is the mobile news app of Chongqing Daily. | |
The Rap of China | 03:45, 27 April 2021 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1585828142784634075&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180316151945/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1585828142784634075&wfr=spider&for=pc |
娱乐劲爆 (Entertainment Explosion) | Obviously an unauthenticated unofficial account with a large number of self-published human-interest stories. No relevant information can be searched using Google. | |
Ningqiang County | 20:07, 23 August 2021 | https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1586095409831897090 | 中国日报网 ( China Daily) | N/A | |
List of township-level divisions of Hunan | 08:35, 15 March 2018 |
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1588636661374860205&wfr=spider&for=pc Dead link. Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20180315195834/https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1588636661374860205&wfr=spider&for=pc |
草木飞 (Grass and wood flying) | / | Similar to the Shiting case. The author seems to have simply reproduced the source of the "新巴陵" (New Baling) WeChat public number, which is the new media of Yueyang County Government. The problem is the same. |
Except for one invalid source, 14 of the 19 sources should be avoided, and even with the lowered criteria, there are still 11 sources that should not be used to describe a fact.
While it is true that YouTube was not given a filter in the previous RFC, Facebook was given a filter in the previous RFC. Considering that Baijiahao is also a platform that publishes a lot of text content rather than video content, a more appropriate comparison should be between Baijiahao and Facebook.
In addition, I am concerned about whether anyone is able to check the sources, and from the results in the table above, it appears that most of the content has never been effectively verified. Considering that most of the videos in YouTube are in English while the two platforms I listed are in Chinese - I think this would lead to YouTube links being more susceptible to verification, which is not the case with the latter two - I still stand by that filter is necessary. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 00:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Routesonline.com is used as a source in 807 articles on Wikipedia, almost universally for airline destinations according to this search. Is it reliable or not reliable as a source for airline destinations?
Just feel the need to point out that if the concern is that the site is insufficiently independent to be considered third-party, that there is nothing wrong with using first-party sources for verifying basic facts that need no interpretation ( WP:PSTS). oknazevad ( talk) 22:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to know if the following sources are reliable for this content:
In 2019, UFO seekers began visiting a Buddha statue on a hilltop outside of Nakhon Sawan, three hours north of Bangkok, who believe that they can telepathically communicate with Buddist aliens.
Sources:
Thanks! A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 19:28, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I ask because a user suggested the following sources be added to Steven Universe#Reception:
Pop Matters is also mentioned, but it is my understanding, from reading through previous discussions on this Noticeboard, it is considered a reliable source.
With that, I look forward to your comments on this before I add them (or not) to the Steven Universe page. Historyday01 ( talk) 23:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I've seen republicanchina.org cited in a few Wikipedia articles ( Mo Teh-hui, Alphonse Favier, Suicide Attack, Zhang Xuezhong (general), Operation Nekka order of battle), mostly related to China. Reading the front page of the website it seems to some sort of blog or self-published website with strong political opinions about Chinese history. Most of the content it's cited to support appears relatively innocuous, but I honestly don't think this website should be relied on for even basic facts. SilverStar54 ( talk) 16:00, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Heed the sons & ministers' agony and sorrow of our ancestors who died or lived through the Mongol, Manchu and Soviet-Chicom conquest and the Yongjia, Jingkang and Jiashen cataclysms !and
Note Barack Hussein Obama's half brother 'adopted' China or was adopted by communist China, setting an example for numerous Africans who came to China and worked as coyotes engaged in the operation of smuggling the illegal Africans to China. No idea what this is, but it shouldn't be used for referencing anything. I would suggest removing it on sight. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆ transmissions∆ ° co-ords° 19:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Asian Boss a YouTube channel is cited for a section in the Otto Warmbier article: [39]. Is this reliable? Jack Upland ( talk) 04:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
News story about the paper here. [40] The underlying paper appears to be this one, though I haven't yet found the full text. [41] This was in the context of AI evaluations of reliability, but it is still likely relevant to us. Adoring nanny ( talk) 22:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Do people think http://www.native-languages.org/ (run by a charitable organisation called Native Languages of the Americas) is a reliable source suitable for using for citations? It seems like, it has an extensive archive of material on various subjects that it's difficult to get references for (e.g. mythology, and of course languages, and things like the fact that a large number of Americans believe that one of their ancestors was a "Cherokee princess" when there never even was such a thing), they seem a bit one-horse but make an effort to run the site in a scholarly way and get things checked by native speakers of the languages involved if they can find any, and they got a good review from this site https://worldhistorycommons.org/native-languages-americas . Wombat140 ( talk) 13:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
We publish original writing by both native and non-native authors, but if the author is not native the article will be checked by a tribal member before being accepted for publication. There's no evidence I can see that original writing by native American authors is checked in any way before publication – even if it's written about a culture with which they have no particular connection. I would want to see more evidence of reliability before using this site. Caeciliusinhorto-public ( talk) 11:09, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
This source is cited at the WP:BLP Garnik Asatrian page. The source is supposed to support some pretty strong claims and assertions supposedly said by him in a 1998 interview [42]. I think we should be careful with interviews. What is said could mean something to one person and something else to another. Also, would it qualify as WP:RS, especially in a WP:BLP article such as this one? Thanks, - LouisAragon ( talk) 23:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello friends, I will name some of the sources in Javad Nazari's article below. Please, are they valid or not? While in the same article, which is related to Mr. Goldie, the English actor and composer, make a comparison so that at least the fairness option is observed. Such databases were documented in Javad Nazari's article imdb Google knowledge panel Amazon cinematographer Web movie set list Myanmar TV channel TV channel 21 Indian Movie Database Iranian film database Provincial news base Local newspaper Base of Iranian theater actors Radio Times etc... are these valid and reliable?! Thanks Miladtanhai ( talk) 17:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
In a discussion in Talk:2024 Republican Party presidential primaries#Revisiting Perry Johnson as a Major Declared Candidate Again, there is a debate as to if a specific candidate should be included as a major candidate. The consensus there is that the candidate needs 5 major and reliable news sources with national reach to talk about them explicitly for them to be included in the major candidate list. Two articles by Vande Bharat, a news source with no Wikipedia article which seems to focus on reporting about the news of Indian trains, was brought up talking about a specific candidate. These two articles are here and here. Every bone in my body wants to say this doesn't count as a major reliable source, but I would like to confirm this for good measure. Scu ba ( talk) 16:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I'd like to ask about the verifiability and applicability of these sources as pertains to the article in question.
For the purpose of context I'm providing them as they would be used in the article.
...
Thanks in advance. Nargothronde ( talk) 12:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
References
... the root of the evil is very deep, reaching as far as Athens. It is from there that the tree of evil, the bitter fruits of which the Greek Cypriot people are tasting today, is being fed and maintained and helped to grow and spread. In order to be absolutely clear I say that cadres of the military regime of Greece support and direct the activity of the EOKA terrorist organisation... It is also known, and an undeniable fact, that the opposition Cyprus press, which supports the criminal activity of EOKA and which has its sources of finance in Athens, received guidance and line from those in charge of the 2nd General Staff Office and the branch of the Greek Central Intelligence Services in Cyprus... Even the evil spirit which possesses the three defroced Cypriot Bishops who have caused a major crisis in the Church emanated from Athens... I have more than once so far felt and in some cases I have almost touched a hand invisibly extending from Athens and seeking to liquidate my human existence... I am not an appointed prefect or locum tenens of the Greek government in Cyprus, but an elected leader of a large section of Hellenism and I demand an appropriate conduct by the National Center towards me.
On Saturday, 13 July, a conference under the presidency of General Gizikis was held in Athens which lasted for many hours. It was attended by the Greek Chief of Staff of the armed forces, the Ambassador of Greece to Cyprus, the Commander of the National Guard and other officials, for the purpose of discussing the content of my letter. As was stated in a relevant communique issued at the end of this conference, it was to be reconvened on Monday, 15 July. The reference in the communique to a second conference was deceiving. For while on Monday I was waiting for a reply to my letter the reply came, and it was the coup.
On the night before the coup... more than 100 Greek army officers, dressed in civilian clothes, boarded an Olympic Airlines 727 for an unscheduled flight to Lefkoşa. The men were seen off by Colonel Michael Pylikhos, a top aide of Ioannidis. Another flight carrying an additional 100 men followed them 24 hours later.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials... People told by Makarios to lay down their guns, were shot by the National Guard.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
On the night before the coup... more than 100 Greek army officers, dressed in civilian clothes, boarded an Olympic Airlines 727 for an unscheduled flight to Lefkoşa. The men were seen off by Colonel Michael Pylikhos, a top aide of Ioannidis. Another flight carrying an additional 100 men followed them 24 hours later.
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
Thousands of Turkish Cypriots were taken hostage after the invasion of Cyprus, Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street and the Turkish quarter of Limasol was burnt out by the National Guard
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
I ran through the streets and the soldiers were shooting all the time. I ran into a house and I saw a woman being attacked by soldiers. They were raping her. Then they shot her in front of my eyes
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
many women and children ... I saw myslef ... twenty dead children in the street and others crying out who were wounded
{{
cite magazine}}
: Cite magazine requires |magazine=
(
help)
The site lists most of the world's volcanoes, including their type, location and when they last erupted. For example, the details of Mount Pavlof in Alaska. [43] But it's not clear to me if it belongs to a reliable source? -- ALSTROEMERIA🌸 Čijukas Kuvajamas 06:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)