Talk:NewsGuard: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:01, 17 April 2022

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Computing: Software Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet Start‑class

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Journalism Start‑class

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Publish News Sources as List; Include "Reliable" News Sources

I think a detailed, standalone list of "Reliable" and "Unreliable" new sources should be given, vs the linear, "in sentence" format being used now. At this time the Article does not include any "reliable" news sources. Also great attention to should be given to exactly how this determination is made, particularly since there is a "license" component, which to me implies that a news source can purchase their "reliability" at the time they pay for their "license". Also, given the recent maneuvers by the SPLC and ADL, I would not be surprised that a News Source's "reliability" would also be determined by their political orientation, and this new quality called "hate".Tym Whittier (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion is not wanted. You start "I think". I don't "think" you understand. I left you a note on your talk page. Eschoryii (talk) 03:02, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard for reliable source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#News_Guard_%2B_Media_Bias_Fact_Check_Redux FrederickZoltair (talk) 00:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Finally

Finally, this has been needed for decades now. The truth will start to be relevant again. And the far right will need a new game. 2600:100F:B133:828B:B95A:FBAC:66B7:D6C3 (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms?

This desperately needs a criticisms section.

The tool is heavily criticized on the right/middle for favoring left-wing outlets. Whether you agree with the criticisms or not, that seems relevant.
The design flaw is assuming sites and not articles are the correct fidelity on what to trust.

E.g. a bar article at CNN will get a better rating then an accurate article on Breitbart. And the same article will get different ratings depending on who the aggregator is. That might be implied to the technical folks, but the average users/readers should probably have that flaw called out by someone that's use to writing in the correct tone. David Every (talk) 21:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 Finally, this has been needed for decades now. The truth will start to be relevant again. And the far right will need a new game. [[Special:Contributions/2600:100F:B133:828B:B95A:FBAC:66B7:D6C3|2600:100F:B133:828B:B95A:FBAC:66B7:D6C3]] ([[User talk:2600:100F:B133:828B:B95A:FBAC:66B7:D6C3|talk]]) 16:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
+== Criticisms? ==
+This desperately needs a criticisms section.
+# The tool is heavily criticized on the right/middle for favoring left-wing outlets. Whether you agree with the criticisms or not, that seems relevant.
+# The design flaw is assuming sites and not articles are the correct fidelity on what to trust.
+E.g. a bar article at CNN will get a better rating then an accurate article on Breitbart. And the same article will get different ratings depending on who the aggregator is. That might be implied to the technical folks, but the average users/readers should probably have that flaw called out by someone that's use to writing in the correct tone.
+[[User:David Every|David Every]] ([[User talk:David Every|talk]]) 21:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)