WikiProject iconReliability
WikiProject iconThis 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

Twitter and Youtube[edit]

Since when did Twitter and Youtube become commonly used as citations? Both are still listed as 'generally unreliable' at WP:RSP. I just ran across the article Alex Hirsch. I discovered 21 tweets used as citations, and a whole handful of youtubes before I quit counting altogether and just gave up. Stripping that stuff would probably reduce the article's citations by half. If anyone is willing to tackle that article with a big pair of scissors, please go for it. Grorp (talk) 07:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When they're added as sources, they're often removed per WP:RSPYT and WP:RSPTWITTER. You should feel free to pare them where warranted. The article shouldn't rely on primary sources and if that info is noteworthy, a reliable, secondary source will cover it. czar 20:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

((Citation needed)) removal drive?[edit]

(directed from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Citation cleanup, carried over here.)

Hi! I'm pretty sure this is the place to ask, so I'm asking if we could do ((citation needed)) tag removal drives. There's a large amount–according to Category:Articles with unsourced statements, there's more than 500,000 articles containing either citation needed or ((failed verification)) tags. So, in order to reduce those by replacing the tags with reliable sources, should we start a drive to remove and replace the tags listed above? Thanks! Tails Wx 14:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx: I like this idea a lot; I've drafted a mock-up of the drive page here. Hopefully that will help get this off the ground. I'd be happy to help coordinate the drive if it does happen. Edward-Woodrow • talk 20:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Edward-Woodrow, @Tails Wx: Happy to help as well, if needed. imo, the bare url drive you mentioned on the other talk page also sounds good, since its simpler to clean up, and has no concerns about citogenesis. (though the cn tags are probably more important/time sensitive) ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 16:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this looks great! It would be awesome to see the backlog number come down (instead of go up) after such a drive. huntertur (talk) 04:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update to Category pages[edit]

To make category pages easier to use, for the individual months within Category:Articles with unsourced statements I added these:

These additions are "cloned" from changes done for:

This update is being posted at:

Overall, I am hopeful these changes will help editors new to article citations and those regularly working to reduce the backlog. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question about 17,118 September 2023 articles[edit]

Wondering what is/has happened with Category:Articles with unsourced statements from September 2023? For "Sports" topic there are 14,637 articles. Is this possible from a bot run? August 2023 has 9,715 articles and Sept is only the 9th day. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 23:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Not verified in body[edit]

Should ((not in body)) be the same as ((not verified in body))?

Should the link go to Template:Not verified in body/doc as opposed to Wikipedia:Citation needed?

Please discuss at Template talk:Not verified in body, thx CapnZapp (talk) 07:20, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Artfacts[edit]

Hi, Is Artfacts.net considered a reliable source? They claim to "meticulously check" all info, and from the research I did they do seem to be rigorous and accurate. I'm wondering if this source can be used for citing major exhibitions on a wikipedia article on a BLP artist.

The article formerly had a laundry list of exhibitions with refs for each. It was moved to talk b/c it read like a resume and caused ref bomb. It seems that the most prominent exhibitions should be included in paragraph form. Wondering if I can use artfacts to cite 4-5 top shows with one source. What do you think? 174.194.142.148 (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend asking on WP:RS/N. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)My Talk Page 21:29, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personation vs impersonation: request[edit]

Hello. There is an issue in the article Shi (personator) regarding its name and the use of the word personator throughout the page. Can someone check the sources that reportedly back the use of the word personator instead of "impersonator"?

According to its lead,

The shi (Chinese: 尸; pinyin: shī; Wade–Giles: sh'ih; lit. 'corpse') was a ceremonial "personator" who represented a dead relative during ancient Chinese ancestral sacrifices. In a shi ceremony, the ancestral spirit supposedly would enter the descendant "corpse" personator, who would eat and drink sacrificial offerings and convey messages from the spirit.

But, according to the article Personation,

Personation (rather than impersonation) is a primarily legal term, meaning "to assume the identity of another person with intent to deceive".[1]

According to the article Impersonator,

An impersonator is someone who imitates or copies the behavior or actions of another.[2]

Therefore, I think it would be more appropriate that the article Shi (personator) be named Shi (impersonator] and most of the instances of the word "personator" in the article, replaced with the word "impersonator". I was going to do it but then I stumbled on references, so I decided to try to check what does the sources say and how to solve this discrepancy, and that's why I am making the request here. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 18:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Kazamzam:. You mentioned you have access to a library to check references. If you have the time it would be great if you could check the references in this request to see if "personation" is the word actually used in them or whether it is both personator and impersonator or other? Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Personate definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary". Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved 7 June 2017.
  2. ^ "Impersonator". The Free Dictionary. Retrieved 2010-01-03.

Is there a list?[edit]

Is there somewhere I can find a list of reliable sources and depreciated sources? I have been looking for a while now and I seem to be just going around in circles. Irtapil (talk) 09:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Irtapil, please see the perennial sources list (WP:RSP) for a list of sources that have been previously discussed on the reliable sources noticeboard. The list of deprecated sources can be found at WP:DEPS. (Please note the spelling of deprecated, which is different from depreciated.) — Newslinger talk 03:28, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog drive notice[edit]

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/February 2024 drive is now active. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 14:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alyssa Mercante[edit]

Ongoing discussion about this source here. Further discussions about the outlet or author generally should be directed at WP:RSN or WT:VG/S. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I question if Alyssa Mercante, the senior editor, and therefore Kotaku itself, should be considered a vialbe source when she says and does think that is very questionable and makes her a very biased person.

(BLP violation removed) [1]https://twitter.com/alyssa_merc/status/1765465735822725277

Also she she now tries to (BLP violation removed). [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAMPUogdMS4 [3]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hrQaMJ74MA Selo007 (talk) 02:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her tweets, and especially her tattoo (particularly when cropped and out of context), seem entirely irrelevant to the reliability of an entire outlet. I suspect a better place to discuss a specific source would be WP:RSN (or WT:VG/S for video games specifically), but if you take it there, I would recommend that you stop posting images of her tattoo as if that has any relevance to Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources at all. Thanks. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Her tweets and tattos clearly makes her align to a specific agenda.
How can you write an unbiased article about men if your think "all men are evil"
How can you write and unbiased article about racism if you think "you cant be racist against white people"
Its not even taken into consideration on the "reliable sources" page
There are alot of violations in the SBI article, but since all complains fall on death ears and just gets deleted its just becomes a hitpiece wikipage with an agenda.
There has been several complains and yoou moderaters point people to where to post complains, it just gets deleted there instead. Selo007 (talk) 05:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Biased sources are okay, as long as they are used correctly—and talk page consensus suggests this one is. It's probably useful to point out that Kotaku is a media publication about video games, not "men" or "racism". It's also useful to point out that Mercante has never said "all men are evil". If you're referring to her tattoo: it's a quote from a book, and the image you keep sharing is only one half of the quote/tattoo.
If your complaints are being deleted on other noticeboards (FWIW, they're not: this is only the second page you have edited), it's worth considering why—like if they might violate Wikipedia's policies on civility or information about living persons. If that doesn't satisfy you, there are several avenues for dispute resolution. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 05:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Category