From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


It's ironic how the word "mainstream" is criticized on this article yet the whole rationale and criteria on the admissibility of a source as "reliable" on Wikipedia is based on how mainstream it is. (talk) 08:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability clearly shows many dimensions about what exactly makes a source reliable. For example, things such as a "conflict of interest" can compromise a source's reliability. It is not just about whether they are "mainstream" or not, but about whether the source has an agenda that eliminates its impartiality. The Pravda was a mainstream newspaper in the Soviet Union but is not considered to be a reliable source.

Morover, on Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines it says that talk pages are for discussion to improve the article itself, not for discussion on the topic of the article. I would delete this Talk Page, because only discussions of the topic itself, and other topics, are on it, but I do not know how to :(Brianc26 (talk) 02:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The talk page as such should not be deleted as it contains the project boxes above. It would be trivial enough to simply remove this section, although it could alternatively be archived; however, I don't feel it's that disruptive.
The observation that the mainstream in academia (Wikipedia's POV) is something completely different from the mainstream in art (often criticised by mainstream academics/intellectuals) is not new, but interesting. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)