Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources

Discuss sources on the reliable sources noticeboard
To discuss the reliability of a source, please start or join a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard (WP:RSN). Discussions on the noticeboard will be added to this list. This talk page is for discussing the maintenance of the list itself, and arguments posted here will not be taken into consideration.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Reliable sources/Perennial sources page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcut

WT:RSP

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10: 28 days

Reliability

This page is part of WikiProject Reliability, a collaborative effort to improve the reliability of Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ReliabilityWikipedia:WikiProject ReliabilityTemplate:WikiProject ReliabilityReliability articles

Wikipedia Help High‑importance

	This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp articles
High	This page has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This project page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Samantha Cole (2 October 2018). "Wikipedia Bans Right Wing Site Breitbart as a Source for Facts". Vice.
Omer Benjakob (9 January 2020). "Why Wikipedia Is Much More Effective Than Facebook at Fighting Fake News". Haaretz.
Oliver Darcy (24 July 2020). "Wikipedia administrators caution editors about using Fox News as source on 'contentious' claims". CNN.
Palmer Haasch (24 July 2020). "After Wikipedia editors battled over citing Fox News as a source, administrators said it should be 'used with caution' for science and politics". Insider.
Noam Cohen (10 August 2020). "Why Wikipedia Decided to Stop Calling Fox a 'Reliable' Source". Wired.
Heather Kelly (15 January 2021). "On its 20th birthday, Wikipedia might be the safest place online". The Washington Post. And when it comes to those sources, there is of course a Wikipedia [page] that lists sources and rates them according to how reliable they are.
Stephen Harrison (1 July 2021). "Wikipedia's War on the Daily Mail". Slate.
Stephen Harrison (1 March 2022). "How the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Is Playing Out on English, Ukrainian, and Russian Wikipedia". Slate.
Maggie Harrison Dupré (29 February 2024). "Wikipedia No Longer Considers CNET a "Generally Reliable" Source After AI Scandal". Futurism.
Benj Edwards (29 February 2024). "AI-generated articles prompt Wikipedia to downgrade CNET's reliability rating". Ars Technica.
Christopher Harper (2 March 2024). "AI-generated content and other unfavorable practices have put longtime staple CNET on Wikipedia's blacklisted sources". Tom's Hardware.

Funding Universe

Hi. I have been recently finding Funding Universe as a ref on quite a few corporate pages. I don't think it is that accurate. Take Walkers Crisps for example, on Funding Universe it says Frito-Lay purchased the business, however articles in business magazine UPI and the New York Times from the time definitely reported PepsiCo Inc directly purchasing the business, not its subsidiary. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 07:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this should probably be discussed on WP:RSN which is the board for particular sources - including examples is very good too - David Gerard (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ESPN.com reliability question

I was wondering if ESPN is considered a reliable source of news for sports news (Like Player trades for example)? ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 04:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent discussions I can find (here and here, from November 2020) suggest that ESPN is considered generally reliable. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, ESPN is generally regarded as a specialist WP:NEWSORG - David Gerard (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is, but there's an important caveat. When reporting on a trade, if the article says "sources tell" ESPN that it's happening, that means that it hasn't happened yet. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The caveat Muboshgu mentions isn't anything specific to ESPN; it's a sports journalism thing, not an ESPN thing. ESPN is as reliable as they come for sports reporting. WP:SPORTSTRANS offers more granular guidance on how to treat player trades when editing Wikipedia. Left guide (talk) 21:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's correct, I should have been more specific about that. ESPN is as good at sports reporting as any other top notch organization. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability of Forbes Russian edition

Greetings, all. The Russian online & print edition of Forbes magazine has been purchased by Magomed Musaev, described in various media as a "Kremlin-connected" "oligarch."^[1]^[2]^[3] At the same time, there have been reports about the Russian magazine's loss of editorial independence.^[4]^[5] Should Wikipedia continue to trust unreservedly the Russian magazine's coverage of Russian and world events? -The Gnome (talk) 18:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent question to raise on WP:RSN. We've tended to just accept the many other editions of Forbes as presumed WP:NEWSORGs up to now, but that might do with some examining - David Gerard (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Ward, Alexander; Berg, Mark; Bazail-Eimil, Eric (8 October 2023). "Former top intel official says to nix Forbes sale". Politico. Retrieved 17 March 2024.
^ Belton, Catherine; C.Frankel, Todd; Dwoskin, Elizabeth (20 October 2023). "Russian tycoon claims he is behind Forbes purchase, audiotapes show". The Washington Post. Retrieved 17 March 2024.
^ Svetlovna, Ksenia (27 December 2023). "Was Russia's McDonald's franchise sold to a straw man for supersized profits?". Times of Israel. Retrieved 17 March 2024.
^ Osetinskaya, Elizaveta (1 August 2018). "Forbes Russia Is Losing Its Independence. Should the World Care?". The Moscow Times. Retrieved 17 March 2024.
^ "RSF backs Forbes Russia's fight for editorial independence". Reporters Without Borders . 1 August 2018. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

Is CBS News reliable?

Would anyone please add CBS News to the list of sources? I want to know if it's reliable or not, and information about its reliability. Ar Colorado (talk) 14:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_403#Any_reason_CBS_News_is_not_listed_in_the_RS/P? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting WP:RSN-discussions with the purpose to include stuff on WP:RSP

Like at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_431#Daily_Sabah_reliable_sources?. Are we for it or against it? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm against it. Waste of time, unless there is an actual controversy, and it's too much like Wikipedia being a reviewer or rater of individual publications, which it shouldn't be. Levivich (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EthniCelebs

The above mentioned website has been marked as an unreliable source by an editor. Just wanted to know whether the community feels the same or if it can be used as I found no other source to verify Karlie Kloss' ancestry on the web. Regards and yours faithfully, MSincccc (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To discuss the reliability of a source, please start or join a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard (WP:RSN). Discussions on the noticeboard will be added to this list. This talk page is for discussing the maintenance of the list itself. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria Thanks a lot. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flowpaper.com

I ran across this in a reference. The source seems to be definitely self-published, and flowpaper.com seems like a place where you can self-publish something and make it appear like it's a source for Wikipedia. Wanted to check here first and see if anyone else has the same opinion. Fred Zepelin (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To discuss the reliability of a source, please start or join a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard (WP:RSN). Discussions on the noticeboard will be added to this list. This talk page is for discussing the maintenance of the list itself. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Fred Zepelin (talk) 20:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sportskeeda.com

Is Sportskeeda a reliable source for citing? They do pick up a lot of sports news that doesn't always make the mainstream news. 75.86.0.60 (talk) 12:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the RSP list Sportskeeda is considered generally unreliable due to a consensus that there is little or no editorial oversight over the website's content, which is largely user-written. Hemiauchenia (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faith in our Institutions

There is a problem in this day and age that people have lost faith in public and private institutions. They don't know who to trust. I would hope that Wikipedia aspired to be nonpartisan but this list was sad for me to take a look at. There is a blatant left wing bias. You're perfectly credulous about CNN and MSNBC which don't even employ conservatives. Meanwhile you don't even consider Fox News nor National Review to be legitimate news sources. This pervasive bias trickles down to ALL political hot button articles I've seen. I'd heard conservative friends say that Wikipedia wasn't worth looking at anymore and I didn't believe it. Now I'm thinking twice. 67.150.98.177 (talk) 06:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[politico-1] Ward, Alexander; Berg, Mark; Bazail-Eimil, Eric (8 October 2023). "Former top intel official says to nix Forbes sale". Politico. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

[wp-2] Belton, Catherine; C.Frankel, Todd; Dwoskin, Elizabeth (20 October 2023). "Russian tycoon claims he is behind Forbes purchase, audiotapes show". The Washington Post. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

[ti-3] Svetlovna, Ksenia (27 December 2023). "Was Russia's McDonald's franchise sold to a straw man for supersized profits?". Times of Israel. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

[moscow-4] Osetinskaya, Elizaveta (1 August 2018). "Forbes Russia Is Losing Its Independence. Should the World Care?". The Moscow Times. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

[rsf-5] "RSF backs Forbes Russia's fight for editorial independence". Reporters Without Borders . 1 August 2018. Retrieved 17 March 2024.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]