Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Reliability

Active discussions
WikiProject Reliability
This 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.

Discussion on FreeMapTools on the reliable sources noticeboardEdit

There is a discussion on the reliability of distance calculations in FreeMapTools (freemaptools.com) on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § ~ free map tools ~. — Newslinger talk 02:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Noticeboard discussion of Hacker Noon and InfoSec HandbookEdit

There is a noticeboard discussion on the reliability of Hacker Noon (hackernoon.com) and InfoSec Handbook (infosec-handbook.eu). If you're interested, please participate at WP:RSN § Hacker Noon (hackernoon.com) and InfoSec Handbook (infosec-handbook.eu) for /e/ (operating system). — Newslinger talk 03:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 15Edit

Newsletter • September 2019

A final update, for now:


The third grant-funded round of WikiProject X has been completed. Unfortunately, while this round has not resulted in a deployed product, I am not planning to resume working on the project for the foreseeable future. Please see the final report for more information.

Regards,

-— Isarra 19:24, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright implications of links to CiteSeerXEdit

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights#CiteSeerX copyrights and linking. Nemo 16:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment on reliability of Liliputing (liliputing.com)Edit

There is a request for comment on the reliability of Liliputing (liliputing.com) on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § RfC: Liliputing. — Newslinger talk 20:43, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment on reliability of VG ChartzEdit

There is a request for comment on the reliability of VG Chartz. If you are interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: VG Chartz. — Newslinger talk 02:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

RfC on reliability of The Epoch TimesEdit

There is a request for comment on the reliability of The Epoch Times. If you are interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: The Epoch Times. — Newslinger talk 04:54, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Non-publicly-accessible sourcesEdit

At Dear Colleague letter (United States) sources included a private phone conversation, a private email, and a meeting that seemingly wasn't publicly minuted. I removed all of these as plainly unverifiable original research. But then there are also a few references to primary sources in the form of "Dear Colleague" letters. A couple of these are posted publicly (I presume; I checked they were available but didn't actually download them). But one is an email sent to congressional workers and members of Congress in 2008. This presumably could only be verified by the strictly limited number of people who have continuously since then worked in Congress or been members of Congress, which will never increase, and will become completely inaccessible when they all leave office. Another is stored in the electronic system for such letters. This is likewise accessible only to a very limited number of people, namely current workers and members of Congress, though in this case at least some people in future will hypothetically be able to access it. It is not possible for a general member of the public to verify them, and I suspect it may be illegal for someone who can verify them to do so without, for example, a freedom of information request. With this in mind, are such sources acceptable? Hairy Dude (talk) 05:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Relevant discussion at Village Pump (proposals)Edit

I've started a discussion here about a proposal to have semi-regular RfCs about sources from systemically-biased-against regions (and topics) in order to reduce systemic bias (particularly in relation to new page patrols). Editors watching this page are encouraged to participate. signed, Rosguill talk 04:58, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice: NPP source guide discussion about Ghanaian sources is underwayEdit

The new pages patrol is hosting its first discussion of sources from regions affected by systemic bias, starting with Ghana, and editors watching this page are invited to participate. This discussion is being hosted in order to better equip new page reviewers to be able to assess articles about subjects in these regions, and is intended to build editor’s basic familiarity with sources. You can find a past discussion of this proposal here. signed, Rosguill talk 19:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Return to the project page "WikiProject Reliability".