Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Francis Schonken (talk | contribs) at 22:45, 5 February 2006 (rv to Jayjg, see Misplaced Pages talk:Verifiability#reliable/credible, nothing has changed since: no new consensus emerged on talk page.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WP:V redirects here. For vandalism, see Misplaced Pages:Vandalism (WP:VAND).

This page documents an English Misplaced Pages policy.It describes a widely accepted standard that editors should normally follow, though exceptions may apply. Changes made to it should reflect consensus.

Shortcut ]

The criterion for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth. This means that we only publish material that is verifiable with reference to reliable, published sources.

Misplaced Pages:Verifiability is one of Misplaced Pages's three content-guiding policy pages. The other two are Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. The three policies are complementary, non-negotiable, and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editor's consensus. They should therefore not be interpreted in isolation from one other, and editors should try to familiarize themselves with all three.

The policy

Citing sources

The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable sources, Misplaced Pages should not have an article on that topic. Any edit lacking a source may be removed, but do not remove large tracts of Misplaced Pages without first giving people a chance to provide references to support their inclusion. If you doubt the accuracy or origin of an unsourced statement that has been in an article for a long time, delete it or move it to the talk page. Alternatively, you may tag the article by adding the {{fact}}, {{not verified}} or {{unsourced}} templates. If the article has many unsourced statements that have been there a long time, you may request sources on the talk page before removing them, unless the article or information is about a living person, in which case remove the unsourced information. When removing information be very careful to do so politely and with civility.

For more information on citing sources including how best to cite sources, see Misplaced Pages:Citing sources.

Sources

Articles should rely on credible, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. For academic subjects, the sources should preferably be peer-reviewed. Sources should also be appropriate to the claims made: outlandish claims beg strong sources.

English-language sources should be given whenever possible, and should always be used in preference to foreign-language sources, so that readers can easily verify that the source material has been used correctly. See Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources for more information.

Sources of dubious reliability

In general, sources of dubious reliability are sources with a poor reputation for fact-checking, or with no fact-checking facilities.

Sometimes a statement can only be found in a publication of dubious reliability, such as a tabloid newspaper. If the statement is relatively unimportant, remove it. If it is important enough to keep, attribute it to the source in question. For example: "According to the British tabloid newspaper The Sun ..."

Self-published sources

Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and 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. Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist, has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information on the professional researcher's blog is really worth reporting, someone else will have done so.

Self-published sources as primary sources

Self-published sources and other sources of dubious reliability may be used as primary-source material in articles about that source. For example, the Stormfront website may be used as a source about itself in an article about Stormfront, so long the information is appropriate, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by third-party sources. Subject to the exceptions above, such a source should never be used as a third-party source about anyone or anything else.

A Misplaced Pages article about an unreliable newspaper should not — on the grounds of needing to give examples of their published stories — repeat any claims the newspaper has made about third parties, unless the stories have been repeated by credible third-party sources.

Other comments

Just because some information is verifiable, doesn't mean that Misplaced Pages is the right place to publish it. See what Misplaced Pages is not. And just because information is true, doesn't mean that it meets our verifiability requirements - information has to be sourced if it is to have a place in Misplaced Pages (although, of course, if information is true, you should be able to find a ready reputable source for it). Another effect of this policy is that as original research will not be supported by reputable sources, it cannot be included. See Misplaced Pages:No original research.

See also

• WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
• Forum for Encyclopedic Standards
• Stable versions
• Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons

• Misplaced Pages policies
• Misplaced Pages official policy