User:RBBB9911/What is a decent, trustworty source?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you’ve made your first few edits to Wikipedia, and you’re proud of them. But what’s this? Someone has reverted your edits, and posted a message on your talk page calling it unsourced? Well then, you may have to read this essay.

Wikipedia relies on two things:

  1. People's passion for knowledge
  2. Sources

However, there are some sources that are just not reliable enough. This essay aims to differentiate between different types of sources.

News[edit]

News is usually one of the best sources for almost all types of information. Period. They come on TV, radio, newspapers (after all, if it didn’t, would it be a newspaper?). However, one thing not all new editors know is that some news sites are reliable enough, though news itself if meant to be reliable. What do you mean, you say? Oh well, by this I actually mean to say that some people (or "anti-social elements", to be more accurate) create what they call "news sites" but in reality just post lies. Now mind yourself, satire websites like The Onion do not count as unreliable. They are meant to entertain, unlike a truly unreliable site.

Now what is the difference between a reliable and an unreliable site?

A reliable site:

  1. Is usually unbiased, but if there is any bias, that does not mean the site is unreliable. A biased site is reliable as long as it reports important news regardless of whom it favours.
  2. Usually has decades of experience.
  3. Admits its mistakes if it messes up in its reports, or at least fixes the mistakes.
  4. Never posts fake news (or at least admits its mistakes if it does).
  5. Usually avoids controversial claims unless completely proven.
  6. Has journalists who never attack random people for their beliefs.
  7. Has an editorial policy

An unreliable site, on the other hand:

  1. Is biased to the point where they report only one side of the story.
  2. Usually is new (less than a decade of experience).
  3. Defends itself every time it gets caught making mistakes.
  4. Frequently posts fake news, usually involving racism, communalism or pseudoscience.
  5. Always goes with controversial claims.
  6. Will harass anyone, just because of their beliefs.
  7. Usually has no editorial policy

For more info on whether a news site is reliable, you may refer Wikipedia:RS/P and Wikipedia:Deprecated sources for examples of reliable and unreliable sources.

Manufacturer Websites[edit]

Ever edited an article about some mobile device or car? Chances are that most specifications in them can be cited from the manufacturer websites.

Where manufacturer websites are usable:

  • Infoboxes
  • In the main text, if and only if the info is already in the infobox

What types of manufacturer websites are reliable:

  • Ones from companies with a good reputation (literally every popular phone/computer/automobile/electronic device manufacturer)

Review Aggregators[edit]

Rotten Tomatoes. Period. There is almost no other review aggregator good enough. IMDb is not reliable because it has user generated content.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:RBBB9911/What_is_a_decent,_trustworty_source%3F&oldid=972346608"