Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Left guide (talk | contribs) →Tabloids: +shortcut Tag: Reverted |
→Inclusion criteria: reflect minimum consensus at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Shortcuts inclusion criteria (in fact consensus might be even more restricted) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 75:
<onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|Inclusion criteria}}}|Inclusion criteria|
For a source to be added to this list, editors generally expect '''two or more significant discussions about the source's reliability in the past, or an uninterrupted [[WP:RFC|request for comment]] on the source's reliability that took place on the [[WP:RSN|reliable sources noticeboard]]'''. For a discussion to be considered significant, most editors expect no fewer than two qualifying participants for RSN discussions where the source's name is in the section heading, and no fewer than three qualifying participants for all other discussions. Qualifying participants are editors who make at least one comment on the source's reliability.
Please do not mass-create shortcuts. Only shortcuts with at least one use should be included on this list.
}}</onlyinclude>
Line 185 ⟶ 187:
===Tabloids===
[[Tabloid journalism|Tabloids]] are types of news reporting characterized by sensationalistic stories. General consensus is that well-established tabloids should be used with care. They often repeat unverified rumors, have questionable fact-checking, and are often unsuitable for information about living people. When judging reliability of tabloids, editors often first assume its reliability to be mixed and then work it up or down. [[Tabloid journalism]] should not be confused with [[tabloid (newspaper format)]]. Many publications that are not tabloid journalism use the tabloid format (and many that are do not).
| |||