| Revision as of 05:42, 7 September 2007 view sourceCan't sleep, clown will eat me (talk | contribs)101,994 editsm Reverted edits by 58.7.88.149 (talk) to last version by BenB4← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:37, 10 September 2007 view source BenB4 (talk | contribs)5,560 edits until we can come up with a solution for transcluding, all of our guidance about what is and is not a reliable source should be here, because far more templates cite this, and it's only 4 paragraphsNext edit → | ||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
| :''See ]'' | :''See ]'' | ||
| Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and ]s are largely not acceptable as sources.<ref>"Blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. | |||
| See e.g., ] for an often-cited example deletion discussion covering this matter. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control; that is, when it isn't really a blog. Posts left on these columns by readers may never be used as sources.</ref> | |||
| Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work '''in the relevant field''' has previously been published by '''reliable third-party publications'''. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so. | |||
| Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see ]. | |||
| Material from self-published sources may also be used as sources in articles about the author, so long as: | |||
| * it is relevant to their notability; | |||
| * it is not contentious; | |||
| * it is not unduly self-serving; | |||
| * it does not involve claims about third parties; | |||
| * it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; | |||
| * there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it; | |||
| * the article is not based primarily on such sources. | |||
| ===Extremist sources=== | ===Extremist sources=== | ||
Revision as of 14:37, 10 September 2007
 | This page documents an English Misplaced Pages content guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page. | Shortcuts |
Misplaced Pages articles should be based on reliable, published sources. This page is a guideline, not a policy: The relevant policies on sources are Misplaced Pages:Verifiability and Misplaced Pages:No original research, and additional restrictions in biographies of living people.
Misplaced Pages:Verifiability says that any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source, as do quotations, and the responsibility for finding a source lies with the person who adds or restores the material. Sometimes it is better to have no information than to have information without a source.
See Misplaced Pages:Verifiability/Noticeboard for queries about the reliability of particular sources; see Misplaced Pages talk:Verifiability for queries about the policy.
What is a reliable source?
Further information: Misplaced Pages:Verifiability and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of viewReliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight. The reliability of a source depends on the context: A world-renowned mathematician may not be a reliable source about biology. However, the author of a source may be reliable outside her/his primary field if s/he has become recognized as having expertise in that secondary area of study. In general, an article should use the most reliable and appropriate published sources to cover all majority and significant-minority published views, in line with Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view.
Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should be appropriate to the claims made: exceptional claims require exceptional sources. All articles must adhere to Misplaced Pages's neutrality policy, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view.
In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. As a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny involved in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the evidence and arguments of a particular work, the more reliable it is.
Academic and peer-reviewed publications are highly valued and usually the most reliable sources in areas where they are available, such as history, medicine and science. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also be used in these areas, particularly if they are respected mainstream publications. The appropriateness of any source always depends on the context. Where there is disagreement between sources, their views should be clearly attributed in the text.
Sources with a poor reputation for fact-checking or with no editorial oversight should only be used in articles about the sources themselves. Articles about such sources should not repeat any contentious claims the source has made about third parties, unless those claims have also been published by reliable sources.
Why use reliable sources?
Further information: Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, Misplaced Pages:No original research, Misplaced Pages:Citing sources, and Misplaced Pages:CopyrightsSources are used:
- To support an assertion made in an article. Sources used in this manner should be directly referenced for the point that is being supported.
- To give credit to the source, to avoid the appearance of plagiarism or copyright violations.
If all the sources for a given statement or topic are of low reliability, the material may not be suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages.
Aspects of reliability
Further information: Misplaced Pages:VerifiabilityArticles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should be appropriate to the claims made.
Scholarship
Misplaced Pages relies heavily upon the established literature created by scientists, scholars and researchers around the world. Items that fit this criterion are usually considered reliable. However, they may be outdated by more recent research, or controversial in the sense that there are alternative scholarly explanations. Misplaced Pages articles should point to all major scholarly interpretations of a topic.
- The material has been thoroughly vetted by the scholarly community. This means published in peer-reviewed sources, and reviewed and judged acceptable scholarship by the academic journals.
- Items that are recommended in scholarly bibliographies are preferred.
- Items that are signed are more reliable than unsigned articles because it tells whether an expert wrote it and took responsibility for it.
Exceptional claims require exceptional sources
Shortcut See also: Misplaced Pages:Fringe theoriesCertain red flags should prompt editors to examine the sources for a given claim.
- Surprising or apparently important claims that are not widely known.
- Surprising or apparently important reports of recent events not covered by reliable news media.
- Reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, embarrassing, controversial, or against an interest they had previously defended.
- Claims not supported or claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view in the relevant academic community. Be particularly careful when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.
Exceptional claims should be supported by multiple high quality reliable sources, especially regarding scientific or medical topics, historical events, politically charged issues, and in material about living people.
Original research is not a reliable source
Misplaced Pages should not be the original source for new research, ideas, interpretations, or analyses. Such original research has not yet been published in a reliable source, and therefore is not suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages. When citing reliable sources, editors must ensure that the sources are not interpreted or analyzed in a novel or non-obvious way.
Biographies of living persons
Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable third-party sources, a biography will violate the No original research and Verifiability policies, and could lead to libel claims.
Self-published sources (online and paper)
ShortcutAnyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.
Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP.
Material from self-published sources may also be used as sources in articles about the author, so long as:
- it is relevant to their notability;
- it is not contentious;
- it is not unduly self-serving;
- it does not involve claims about third parties;
- it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
- there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it;
- the article is not based primarily on such sources.
Extremist sources
Organizations and individuals that are widely acknowledged as extremist, whether of a political, religious or anti-religious, racist, or other nature, should be used only as sources about themselves and their activities in articles about themselves, and even then with caution.
Claims of consensus
Claims of consensus must be sourced. The claim that all or most scientists, scholars, or ministers hold a certain view requires a reliable source. Without it, opinions should be identified as those of particular, named sources.
Convenience links
The term "convenience link" is typically used to indicate a link to a copy of a resource somewhere on the Internet, offered in addition to a formal citation to the same resource in its original format. Such links are unique in how reliability is applied. It is important to ensure that the copy being linked is a true copy of the original, without any comments, emendations, edits or changes. When the "convenience link" is hosted by a site that is considered reliable on its own, this is relatively easy to assume. However, when such a link is hosted on a less reliable site, the linked version should be checked for accuracy against the original, or not linked at all if such verification is not possible.
Examples
See Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/examples for examples of the use of statistical data, advice by subject area (including history, physical sciences, mathematics and medicine, law, Business and Commerce, popular culture and fiction), and the use of electronic or online sources.
See also
- Misplaced Pages:Check your facts, essay
- Misplaced Pages:Common knowledge, essay
- Misplaced Pages:Independent sources, essay
- Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
- Misplaced Pages:Verifiability
- Misplaced Pages:No original research
- Misplaced Pages:Citing sources
External links
- How to Read a Primary Source, Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students, Patrick Rael, 2004.
- How to Read a Secondary Source, Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students, Patrick Rael, 2004.
Footnotes
- Tiny-minority views and fringe theories need not be included, except in articles devoted to them.
- "Blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. See e.g., Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/The_Game_(game)_(6th_nomination) for an often-cited example deletion discussion covering this matter. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control; that is, when it isn't really a blog. Posts left on these columns by readers may never be used as sources.