25 votes

Wikipedia bans right wing site Breitbart as a source for facts

Topic removed by site admin

5 comments

  1. [5]
    nathan
    Link
    Why are news organizations allowed to be sources in the first place? Pretty much every statement in a news article should come with a [citation needed]

    Why are news organizations allowed to be sources in the first place? Pretty much every statement in a news article should come with a [citation needed]

    11 votes
    1. [2]
      meghan
      Link Parent
      When the publisher is reputable and the content is OC journalism, news sites are valuable info

      When the publisher is reputable and the content is OC journalism, news sites are valuable info

      9 votes
      1. Octofox
        Link Parent
        Some news websites are fairly useful and others are next to useless. DailyMail was another one of the useless websites on the wikipedia ban list.

        Some news websites are fairly useful and others are next to useless. DailyMail was another one of the useless websites on the wikipedia ban list.

        4 votes
    2. alyaza
      Link Parent
      not much into wiki, but i would guess a lot of why is because of primary sourcing rules. to quote WP:PRIMARY needless to say, news as such tends to be a major source of acceptable secondary...

      not much into wiki, but i would guess a lot of why is because of primary sourcing rules.

      to quote WP:PRIMARY

      Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources.

      needless to say, news as such tends to be a major source of acceptable secondary sources for Wikipedia--in some cases, it's the only source of secondary sources on an issue (like natural disasters).

      5 votes
    3. [2]
      Comment removed by site admin
      Link Parent
      1. nathan
        Link Parent
        Yeah my comment was more flippant than it needed to be. I also wasn’t aware that Wikipedia only allows secondary sources. Regarding the citation needed, I was expressing my frustration at how news...

        Yeah my comment was more flippant than it needed to be. I also wasn’t aware that Wikipedia only allows secondary sources. Regarding the citation needed, I was expressing my frustration at how news organizations (I’m going to include Brietbart here, under the definition that it is a news organization because people consume their content for news, regardless of their lack of adherence to journalism standards) are given the authority to be sources of truth but that authority is used to give readers the information that aligns with the organizations goals.

        2 votes