User talk:Vinwriteswords
The Cosmic Circus[edit]
Hi. As The Cosmic Circus is not a reliable source, please do not use them as citations. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:49, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, how did you make that assessment? You can check this page for more information: https://www.thecosmiccircus.com/confirmed/
- Thank you! Vinwriteswords (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Cosmic Circus was the first to report Will Poulter as Adam Warlock and the Werewolf By Night on Disney+. These were later confirmed by bigger outlets, proving that The Cosmic Circus' reports were accurate and should be cited as the original sources of the information.
- https://www.thecosmiccircus.com/rumor-will-poulter-may-be-cast-as-adam-warlock/
- https://www.thecosmiccircus.com/exclusive-werewolf-by-night-to-be-a-disney-series-working-title-and-filming-date-revealed/ Vinwriteswords (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- This is not determined based on how accurate their reporting is. Sites like this that dedicate to reporting speculative information (a.k.a. "leaks") are generally unreliable and may not be used as sources. The fact that they felt the need to compile a list of their rumors which turned out to be true speaks for itself, the site's reputation is clearly questionable. InfiniteNexus (talk) 14:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- Is a report from a small site still unreliable if it was confirmed by big outlets? How can a new, small site become reliable if you choose to ignore their track record of correct information? This logic harms the growth of the community by favoring ONLY established reputations and erasing small sites that are doing legitimate work to establish themselves. If a new, small site is the first to report something, and their report is confirmed just a few days later by a trusted outlet, then shouldn't the original site be trusted as well? When this happens several times in a row, doesn't that establish credibility and reliability? Vinwriteswords (talk) 11:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- We don't get to decide whether a source is reliable or not. Give WP:NOTRS and WP:UBO a read. The first article that you linked also literally contains the word "rumor" in the title, a direct violation of Wikipedia's policy against WP:RUMORs. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the help and information. I'll try to review Wikipedia's criteria so I can understand this better in the future. Appreciate your time, I'm sorry for the fuss. Vinwriteswords (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- No worries!
InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:21, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- No worries!
- Thank you for the help and information. I'll try to review Wikipedia's criteria so I can understand this better in the future. Appreciate your time, I'm sorry for the fuss. Vinwriteswords (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- We don't get to decide whether a source is reliable or not. Give WP:NOTRS and WP:UBO a read. The first article that you linked also literally contains the word "rumor" in the title, a direct violation of Wikipedia's policy against WP:RUMORs. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Is a report from a small site still unreliable if it was confirmed by big outlets? How can a new, small site become reliable if you choose to ignore their track record of correct information? This logic harms the growth of the community by favoring ONLY established reputations and erasing small sites that are doing legitimate work to establish themselves. If a new, small site is the first to report something, and their report is confirmed just a few days later by a trusted outlet, then shouldn't the original site be trusted as well? When this happens several times in a row, doesn't that establish credibility and reliability? Vinwriteswords (talk) 11:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- This is not determined based on how accurate their reporting is. Sites like this that dedicate to reporting speculative information (a.k.a. "leaks") are generally unreliable and may not be used as sources. The fact that they felt the need to compile a list of their rumors which turned out to be true speaks for itself, the site's reputation is clearly questionable. InfiniteNexus (talk) 14:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
