Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in source reliability discussions
 | This is an essay on the reliability of sources. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community. |
 | This page in a nutshell: When discussing source reliability at the reliable sources noticeboard, article talk pages, and elsewhere, arguments should be grounded in the reliable sources guideline; this page highlights some arguments to avoid. |
"Just a vote"
[edit]- Deprecate IDontTrustAnything (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Generally reliable EverythingIsTrue (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
Again, polling is not a substitute for discsusion. Consensus is weighted based off of arguments grounded in policy, not based on votes.
Trusted by X
[edit]- Generally unreliable because the browser extension NewsGuard says so. MythDebunker (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Generally reliable because it is neutral according to Media Bias/Fact Check. TruthSeeker (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Additional considerations apply as it was rated poor by Ad Fontes Media NuancedReader (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
News monitoring organizations are unable to assess whether a source complies with all of Wikipedia's policies. A source being rated poorly by multiple organizations is indicative that it is potentially unsuitable for inclusion on Wikipedia, but not always.
Citations on Wikipedia
[edit]- Generally reliable: It's cited over 1,000 times on Wikipedia. Mainstreamer (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Generally unreliable: It's not cited anywhere on Wikipedia. WhatEvenIsThis (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
Popularity
[edit]- Generally reliable: The website's Facebook page has over 1 million likes. You'reFamous (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Generally reliable: The author has over 20 million Instagram followers. CelebrityWatcher (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
- Generally unreliable: The book sold less than 100 copies. IDon'tKnowYou (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
Notability/having a Wikipedia article
[edit]- Generally reliable since it's notable with its own Wikipedia article. GNG Fan (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
Opinions about content
[edit]- Generally unreliable: That site mostly spews trivial information. WhatAMess (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)