26:
930:
portals). The quality of Usenet varies, with a large proportion of it being user generated content, with little editorial control (moderated groups being the exception). Usenet threads from such portals may also have been edited compared to original postings. Usenet postings from such portals should
300:
source unless there is evidence—not in the byline but the body of the article—of independent authorship and editorial review in the article you're citing. Searching the subject of the article you're citing may turn up identically or almost identically-worded articles elsewhere and at that point it's
1008:
are generally not considered reliable. However, exceptions can apply - some fan sites contain scans of small extracts of old newspaper and magazine articles, and these may be the most convenient way to cite facts based off the original published content. Be careful, however, as these scans may
996:
directories, the scams involve the selling of "memberships" in fraudulent directories that are created online or through instant publishing services. Because the purpose of the fraud is only to get money from those included, the contents are unlikely to be reliable.
497:
Obituaries published by funeral homes are the same as an advertisement; the only difference from a commercial advertisement in a glossy magazine being that instead of a corporate sponsor, the ad is being published by the family or friends of the deceased. Examples:
1013:, which must not be used to cite facts in an article. If using a copyrighted source from a fan site, the citation should be to the original copyrighted source, not the fansite, and the fansite should not be linked to from Knowledge (XXG), not even as a
918:
as a "content farm" that pays its writers to produce "breezy, popular interest pieces with no footnotes" based on popular search terms, and concern was expressed that it may be drawing uncredited information from
Knowledge (XXG) and creating an
795:
1021:- unless the complete source is available, excerpts may be taken out of context, or changed to fit the site's POV, and are therefore unreliable. Transcripts of content are generally not reliable unless produced by a reliable source.
639:, as they typically reach such status by screening submissions for novelty and other features which are also risk factors: at least in the hard sciences, the articles they publish were shown to struggle to reach average reliability.
85:
gives general advice on what is and isn't a reliable source; this essay aims to analyse specific examples of sources that might initially appear to be reliable, yet may not be. If in doubt about a source, discuss this at the
1081:
748:
600:
in its name should be treated with caution: most only serve to promote that topic and are not reliable sources for anything other than their own viewpoint. Examples of such promotional journals include
329:, which has a long and documented history of publishing misrepresentations, fabrications, half-truths and outright lies about people it politically opposes. See the site's article for examples and see
429:. While they may resemble the format used by legitimate websites (especially in the case of the former), the content is by amateur writers paid by page views and other factors, and are effectively
760:
1101:
160:
have also been described as propaganda outlets for the government. However, such sources may be reliable for determining the official positions of their sponsoring governments. Similarly,
865:
Most of the content on this site is created by h2g2's
Researchers, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC.
1036:
It is a convention in scholarly works to add notes of "personal communication" or "pers. comm." with an individual or organisation who are considered knowledgeable on a topic, e.g. see
168:
and other US state media sources may also be unreliable as to facts, as they have been described as propaganda, but may be reliable regarding the official position of the United States.
740:
225:
915:
730:
722:
442:
438:
434:
183:
179:
175:
1028:
reliable - anyone can set up a web site and claim to be part of an "editorial team" without establishing a widely known reputation for fact checking and content control.
1240:
265:
criteria (established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications, but must
941:
593:, and its journal, the Journal for Scientific Exploration, which publishes almost exclusively on fringe topics, promoting pseudoscience and conspiracy theories.
744:
649:
530:
333:
that deprecated its use as a reference for facts. May be useful for discussing opinions, but should never be used to support negative claims about people.
108:
All mainstream news media can make mistakes. Particularly with breaking news, corrections will need to be made and should be watched out for, and much
850:
World
Heritage Encyclopedia (worldheritage.org), also hosted on World eBook Library (www.ebooklibrary.org) and World Library (www.worldlibrary.org);
82:
784:
258:
174:
has received criticism for errors in breaking news and has a reputation for gossip, but it is increasingly seen as credible by other news agencies (
739:
in general. Several of their books dating to a period before
Knowledge (XXG) have also been plagiarized from other sources. See discussions at
112:
will be sensationalist and gossip-driven. Fact checking has reduced generally in the news media over recent years. For more on the trend of
41:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
454:– In a few high-profile incidents, major news services have reported on content from this satirical news site, mistaking it for real news.
228:
discussing its validity), equivalent television shows, should be used with caution, especially if they are making sensational claims. The
42:
1086:
880:
476:– satirical articles based on actual events that provide a button readers can use to highlight the portions of an article that are real
589:
292:
without telling readers they used text from a site which publishes companies' press releases almost word for word. Any article citing
1076:
813:) — an online encyclopedia that, in part, selects and rewrites certain Knowledge (XXG) articles through a focus on the values of the
764:
715:
705:
657:
479:
149:
950:
These may appear to be reliable as they are in Google Books and Amazon, but they have no editorial oversight. Some of the biggest
904:
fantasticfiction.co.uk. Used on 1000s of articles about books, but it is a commercial site with no clear editorial oversight. See
879:. Wikipedians often make the mistake of thinking that because this used to be hosted by the BBC, it is reliable. However, it is
726:
1038:
Citing
Medicine: The NLM Style Guide for Authors, Editors, and Publishers. Chapter 13: Letters and Other Personal Communication
905:
653:
486:
165:
1106:
1091:
99:
306:
103:
81:". We rely on what is written in external sources to write this encyclopedia, yet not all sources are equal. The guideline
1066:
1014:
1235:
721:
Multiple Indian books such as
Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, Freedom fighters of India, a series of "
1018:
141:
517:
Scholarly journals are normally reliable sources, but some journals have a reputation for bias or unreliability.
756:
671:
208:
687:
379:
562:
1115:
1096:
806:
629:
421:
512:
330:
46:
1071:
382:. Not what we should be reaching for, with our mission to provide the public with articles summarizing
663:
547:
522:
301:
evident that the text of a primary source is being reproduced in the article(s) you're looking at. See
261:. A small proportion of Forbes.com contributors may have credentials to qualify for citation under the
56:
931:
not be used for
Knowledge (XXG) purposes without additional sourcing from reliable non-Usenet sources.
289:
883:
and therefore not reliable as a source, though in certain contexts it might meet the criteria for an
625:
611:
570:
133:
1010:
675:
667:
473:
297:
538:
254:
678:. Some examples that appear in Google Books and are frequently inadvertently used by editors are:
597:
34:
821:. It "aims to organize and present human knowledge in ways consistent with our natural purposes."
814:
554:
203:
137:
109:
731:
Knowledge (XXG):Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_37#ISHA_books_and_other_circular_references
670:
are possibilities if we are unaware that sources we use copy from
Knowledge (XXG). Lists are at
469:
463:
345:
is the practice of lightly repackaging press releases and republishing them. These sources are
78:
576:
1200:
1184:
582:
543:
457:
316:
247:
191:
1111:
350:
1191:
1174:
770:
Cram101, aka CTI Reviews, Content
Technologies Inc., Just The Facts 101, Textbook Key Facts
603:
161:
951:
430:
378:
These are blogs that are opinion-driven and subject to all kinds of external interests and
346:
262:
87:
985:
400:
153:
1041:
884:
787:
to let editors who added these sources know why they should not be used, and you can use
736:
302:
901:
are usually taken directly from Knowledge (XXG), which is clearly indicated on the page.
257:—similar to a content farm (see below). Articles written by Forbes.com contributors are
1195:
1162:
818:
683:
525:, however, a short list of journals which should be used with extreme caution include:
285:
277:
236:
1229:
636:
460:– Satirical news originating on this site mistakenly ended up on a few US news sites.
395:
390:
326:
230:
796:
Knowledge (XXG):Potentially unreliable sources/Books that plagiarize Knowledge (XXG)
49:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
426:
416:
412:
367:
214:
157:
156:, formerly known as Russia Today, and other Russian government-funded sources like
1136:
945:
920:
293:
280:. Other online sources of news rely on such sources for their own articles—even
273:
129:
121:
788:
989:
698:
617:
518:
362:
342:
296:, VerticalNews or similar online business news sources should be considered a
243:
220:
113:
1187:
1179:
1037:
575:, published by Medical Veritas International Inc., listed by Quackwatch as a
407:
Sites that may appear to be reliable sources for Knowledge (XXG), but are not
958:
894:
711:
451:
281:
1203:
269:
be used as third-party citations on statements relating to living persons).
1163:"Prestigious Science Journals Struggle to Reach Even Average Reliability"
968:
357:
320:
145:
1005:
1216:
1082:
Knowledge (XXG):Otto Middleton (or why newspapers are dubious sources)
898:
927:
128:
State-associated or state-controlled news organisations, especially
876:
1102:
Knowledge (XXG):Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources
706:
Knowledge (XXG):Mirrors and forks/Ghi#Icon Group International
632:. These are very unlikely to be accepted as reliable sources.
171:
20:
765:
Knowledge (XXG):Mirrors and forks/Def#Fililquarian Publishing
1118:
designed to facilitate the detection of unreliable sources.
305:
for when it's good to use primary sources and independent
1024:
The opinions of a fan site owner or owners are generally
992:
biographical directory. While there are many legitimate
735:
Books published by Gyan Publishing / Isha Books are not
199:
be used, as most stories in them are intentional hoaxes.
1052:
1049:
972:
962:
888:
851:
844:
840:
836:
832:
828:
824:
810:
777:
771:
702:
691:
77:
Knowledge (XXG)'s requirement for writing articles is "
64:
725:" books and some other books by Om Gupta published by
682:
Alphascript Publishing and the many other imprints of
566:, edited by and published by climate change denialists
558:, non-peer reviewed and known for unscientific content
635:Be aware of journals which boast about their high
534:(JPandS), publishes from an unscientific viewpoint
942:Knowledge (XXG):List of self-publishing companies
716:Knowledge (XXG):Mirrors and forks/Abc#Books, LLC
124:. Specific examples to treat carefully include:
863:
1040:. On Knowledge (XXG) this is considered to be
8:
662:Knowledge (XXG) should not cite itself, but
650:User:Uncle G/On common Google Books mistakes
290:implausible corporate press release material
259:not reviewed by editors prior to publication
240:should be treated with even greater caution.
83:Knowledge (XXG):Identifying reliable sources
697:Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases by
531:Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
906:the Administrators' Noticeboard discussion
482:– publishes from an unscientific viewpoint
1241:Knowledge (XXG) essays about verification
1194:
1178:
791:to find when the source was first added.
276:and VerticalNews are entirely corporate
43:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
1128:
1019:WP:Citing sources#Say where you read it
1087:Knowledge (XXG):Reliable sources/Flaws
654:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) clones
612:Complementary and Alternative Medicine
431:self-published, user-generated content
253:, most of its articles are written by
189:The more extreme tabloids such as the
1077:Knowledge (XXG):Fictitious references
658:Knowledge (XXG):Mirrors and forks/All
433:that lacks editorial oversight. (see
7:
914:Wisegeek.com. WP:RSN discussion has
727:ISHA books and Gyan publishing house
628:, for example journals published by
523:list of non-recommended periodicals
136:, such as the Chinese press agency
1161:Brembs, Björn (20 February 2018).
1107:Knowledge (XXG):Deprecated sources
1092:Knowledge (XXG):Baby and Bathwater
590:Society for Scientific Exploration
100:Knowledge (XXG):Deprecated sources
47:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
480:American College of Pediatricians
466:– a satirical news site in Canada
104:Knowledge (XXG):Perennial sources
1219:, Professors World Peace Academy
1067:Category:Knowledge (XXG) sources
24:
18:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
1167:Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
487:List of satirical news websites
166:Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
573:: The Journal of Medical Truth
550:for publishing fringe theories
415:– these include sites such as
1:
926:groups.google.com (and other
419:(not to be confused with the
723:Faith & philosophy in...
672:Knowledge (XXG):Republishers
577:"questionable organization".
88:reliable sources noticeboard
1137:"Obituary | Elmer G. BOLDS"
246:– although a branch of the
1257:
1097:Knowledge (XXG):CHURNALISM
1044:, which is not permitted.
939:
793:
757:Filiquarian Publishing LLC
647:
606:Research Society Quarterly
510:
142:Korean Central News Agency
97:
54:
979:
288:have published some very
1180:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00037
563:Energy & Environment
338:Science churnalism sites
150:propaganda organisations
79:verifiability, not truth
1017:. However, be aware of
644:Knowledge (XXG) mirrors
596:Any publication with a
1236:Knowledge (XXG) essays
1032:Personal communication
867:
807:New World Encyclopedia
630:OMICS Publishing Group
422:San Francisco Examiner
331:the September 2018 RFC
132:in countries with low
1072:User:Zenwhat/Greylist
837:spiritus-temporis.com
833:absoluteastronomy.com
648:Further information:
425:) and those owned by
263:self-published source
148:in Iran. They may be
45:, as it has not been
1050:Search for uses here
936:Self-published books
664:circular referencing
626:predatory publishers
1141:Thomas Funeral Home
1015:WP:Convenience link
1011:copyright violation
539:Rivista di Biologia
485:Other sites on the
374:Stock chasing blogs
255:paid "contributors"
140:, the North Korean
899:artist biographies
815:Unification Church
776:Hephaestus Books,
555:Medical Hypotheses
507:Scholarly journals
384:accepted knowledge
323:without exception.
204:tabloid newspapers
110:tabloid journalism
1042:original research
583:Mankind Quarterly
544:Giuseppe Sermonti
458:The Daily Currant
448:Articlesnatch.com
307:secondary sources
226:February 2017 RFC
192:National Enquirer
75:
74:
1248:
1220:
1214:
1208:
1207:
1198:
1182:
1158:
1152:
1151:
1149:
1147:
1133:
988:is a fraudulent
921:information loop
871:
825:enotes.com/topic
272:The articles on
162:Voice of America
67:
28:
27:
21:
1256:
1255:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1215:
1211:
1160:
1159:
1155:
1145:
1143:
1135:
1134:
1130:
1125:
1063:
1034:
1003:
982:
980:Who's who scams
973:search for uses
963:search for uses
952:self-publishing
948:
938:
889:search for uses
873:
869:
861:
852:search for uses
811:search for uses
803:
798:
778:search for uses
772:search for uses
703:search for uses
692:search for uses
668:fact-laundering
660:
646:
610:Evidence-based
571:Medical Veritas
515:
509:
502:Thomas Funerals
495:
409:
401:The Motley Fool
376:
340:
118:Flat Earth News
106:
96:
71:
70:
63:
59:
51:
50:
25:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1254:
1252:
1244:
1243:
1238:
1228:
1227:
1222:
1221:
1209:
1153:
1127:
1126:
1124:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1109:
1104:
1099:
1094:
1089:
1084:
1079:
1074:
1069:
1062:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1033:
1030:
1009:actually be a
1002:
999:
986:Who's Who scam
981:
978:
977:
976:
966:
937:
934:
933:
932:
924:
912:
909:
902:
892:
881:user generated
862:
860:
859:Online sources
857:
856:
855:
848:
829:worldlingo.com
822:
819:Sun Myung Moon
802:
801:Online mirrors
799:
781:
780:
774:
768:
761:AfD discussion
754:
753:
752:
719:
709:
695:
688:WP:ALPHASCRIPT
684:VDM Publishing
645:
642:
641:
640:
633:
622:
594:
586:
579:
567:
559:
551:
535:
508:
505:
504:
503:
494:
491:
490:
489:
483:
477:
474:Politicalo.com
467:
461:
455:
449:
446:
408:
405:
404:
403:
398:
393:
375:
372:
371:
370:
365:
360:
339:
336:
335:
334:
324:
319:sites such as
310:
286:Yahoo! Finance
278:press releases
270:
268:
241:
237:Sunday Express
224:(see also the
200:
187:
169:
95:
92:
73:
72:
69:
68:
60:
55:
52:
40:
39:
31:
29:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1253:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1233:
1231:
1218:
1213:
1210:
1205:
1202:
1197:
1193:
1189:
1186:
1181:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1157:
1154:
1142:
1138:
1132:
1129:
1122:
1117:
1113:
1110:
1108:
1105:
1103:
1100:
1098:
1095:
1093:
1090:
1088:
1085:
1083:
1080:
1078:
1075:
1073:
1070:
1068:
1065:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1054:
1051:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1043:
1039:
1031:
1029:
1027:
1022:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1007:
1000:
998:
995:
991:
987:
974:
970:
967:
964:
960:
957:
956:
955:
953:
947:
943:
935:
929:
925:
922:
917:
913:
910:
907:
903:
900:
896:
893:
890:
886:
885:external link
882:
878:
875:
874:
872:
866:
858:
853:
849:
846:
842:
841:Conservapedia
838:
834:
830:
826:
823:
820:
816:
812:
808:
805:
804:
800:
797:
792:
790:
786:
779:
775:
773:
769:
766:
762:
758:
755:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
733:
732:
728:
724:
720:
717:
713:
710:
707:
704:
700:
696:
693:
689:
685:
681:
680:
679:
677:
673:
669:
665:
659:
655:
651:
643:
638:
637:impact factor
634:
631:
627:
623:
620:
619:
614:
613:
607:
605:
599:
595:
592:
591:
587:
585:
584:
580:
578:
574:
572:
568:
565:
564:
560:
557:
556:
552:
549:
545:
541:
540:
536:
533:
532:
528:
527:
526:
524:
520:
514:
506:
501:
500:
499:
493:Funeral homes
492:
488:
484:
481:
478:
475:
471:
468:
465:
462:
459:
456:
453:
450:
447:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
423:
418:
414:
413:Content farms
411:
410:
406:
402:
399:
397:
396:TheStreet.com
394:
392:
391:Seeking Alpha
389:
388:
387:
385:
381:
373:
369:
366:
364:
361:
359:
356:
355:
354:
352:
348:
344:
337:
332:
328:
327:Breitbart.com
325:
322:
318:
314:
311:
308:
304:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
266:
264:
260:
256:
252:
250:
245:
242:
239:
238:
233:
232:
231:Daily Express
227:
223:
222:
217:
216:
211:
210:
205:
201:
198:
194:
193:
188:
185:
181:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
134:press freedom
131:
127:
126:
125:
123:
119:
115:
111:
105:
101:
93:
91:
89:
84:
80:
66:
62:
61:
58:
53:
48:
44:
38:
36:
30:
23:
22:
16:
1212:
1170:
1166:
1156:
1144:. Retrieved
1140:
1131:
1048:
1035:
1025:
1023:
1004:
993:
983:
954:houses are:
949:
940:Main pages:
916:described it
868:
864:
783:You can use
782:
701:Publishing (
661:
624:Be aware of
616:
609:
602:
598:fringe topic
588:
581:
569:
561:
553:
542:, edited by
537:
529:
516:
513:WP:CITEWATCH
496:
427:Demand Media
420:
417:Examiner.com
383:
377:
368:ScienceDaily
341:
317:conspiracist
312:
248:
235:
229:
219:
215:Daily Mirror
213:
207:
202:In general,
196:
190:
158:Sputnik News
120:, a book by
117:
107:
76:
32:
15:
1116:user script
946:Author mill
911:Answers.com
845:revolvy.com
380:speculation
351:independent
294:PR Newswire
274:PR Newswire
130:state media
122:Nick Davies
33:This is an
1230:Categories
1123:References
794:See also:
699:Icon Group
676:WP:MIRRORS
618:Homeopathy
519:QuackWatch
511:See also:
470:Newslo.com
464:The Lapine
363:Eurekalert
343:Churnalism
244:Forbes.com
221:Daily Mail
206:, such as
114:churnalism
98:See also:
94:News media
1188:1662-5161
994:Who's Who
990:Who's Who
959:iUniverse
895:BBC Music
789:Wikiblame
785:this note
745:WT:MIRROR
712:Books LLC
452:The Onion
282:CNN Money
1204:29515380
1146:31 March
1061:See also
1006:Fansites
1001:Fansites
969:Lulu.com
604:Creation
358:Phys.org
349:and not
321:Infowars
251:magazine
146:Press TV
57:Shortcut
1196:5826185
1112:WP:UPSD
1053:or here
298:primary
209:The Sun
195:should
1173:: 37.
928:Usenet
897:. The
870:— h2g2
741:WP:RSN
729:. See
656:, and
615:, and
521:has a
347:WP:SPS
249:Forbes
218:, the
138:Xinhua
116:, see
65:WP:PUS
1217:About
749:WT:IN
737:WP:RS
686:(see
548:noted
313:Never
303:WP:RS
267:never
197:never
35:essay
1201:PMID
1185:ISSN
1148:2019
1114:- A
944:and
877:h2g2
751:etc.
674:and
666:and
472:and
315:use
284:and
234:and
144:and
102:and
1192:PMC
1175:doi
1026:not
817:of
763:) (
386:.
172:TMZ
1232::
1199:.
1190:.
1183:.
1171:12
1169:.
1165:.
1139:.
984:A
891:).
843:,
839:,
835:,
831:,
827:,
747:,
743:,
690:,
652:,
608:,
546:,
441:,
437:,
353::
212:,
186:).
182:,
178:,
164:,
154:RT
152:.
90:.
1206:.
1177::
1150:.
1055:.
975:)
971:(
965:)
961:(
923:.
908:.
887:(
854:.
847:,
809:(
767:)
759:(
718:)
714:(
708:)
694:)
621:.
445:)
443:3
439:2
435:1
309:.
184:3
180:2
176:1
37:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.