Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

Content deleted Content added
Rokus01 (talk | contribs)
→‎Extremist sources: Back to rephrasing of SandyGeorgia: RS obviously don't seek to highlight extremist sources. Please TALK.
Undid revision 191875269 by Rokus01 (talk) per talk and 3RR warning
Line 32: Line 32:
====Extremist sources====
====Extremist sources====
{{main|Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable_sources}}
{{main|Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable_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. The same restrictions apply to sections of reliable sources that quote or paraphrase 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.


====Self-published sources====
====Self-published sources====

Revision as of 16:54, 16 February 2008

This page is a content guideline, which as noted above should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. The relevant policies on sources are Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research, and there are additional restrictions on biographies of living people.

What is a reliable source?

That Wikipedia articles rely on reliable sources is fundamental to the encyclopedia's policies. See the sources section on the Verifiability policy for more.

Aspects of reliability

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.

Reliability of specific source types

Scholarship

Wikipedia 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 However, they may be outdated by more recent research, or controversial in the sense that there are alternative scholarly explanations. Wikipedia 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.

Wikipedia does not publish original research

See No original research

Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position. Material added to articles must be directly and explicitly supported by the cited 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.

Self-published sources

Self-published sources raise reliability concerns. See the policy page Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources (online and paper).

Reliability in specific contexts

Biographies of living persons

See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Sources

Editors must take particular care when writing biographical material about living persons, for legal reasons and in order to be fair. Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material immediately if it is about a living person, and do not move it to the talk page. This applies to any material related to living persons on any page in any namespace, not just the article space.

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.

Other examples

See Wikipedia:Reliable source 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

External links