Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Reliable sources
The following is a list of research conducted on the reliability of sources that are sometimes used for television related articles.
The List[edit]
Supposedly reliable[edit]
- IGN - Generally considered reliable - Reason???
- The Futon Critic - I've seen this one bounced back and forth on the reliability scale - Need concrete answer.
- BuddyTV - I've also seen this one on both sides of the spectrum - Need concrete answer
- TVGuide - considered reliable in most circles - Why?
- MSN - considered reliable - reasons?
- TV Squad - another that's on the fence - why?
- TV by the Numbers - I've heard this referred to as reliable in the past - any opinions?
Supposedly unreliable[edit]
- TV.com - Generally considered unreliable - primarily user-edited with no vesting of edits
- While I agree that the pages on the shows/actors is not reliable, the site does have news articles by the site's actual staff. Ophois (talk) 16:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- True, but some of those news articles are often taken from unreliable sources. I've seen them reporting stuff from fansites and "scoopers". Rarely have I seen them get the "exclusive". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- While I agree that the pages on the shows/actors is not reliable, the site does have news articles by the site's actual staff. Ophois (talk) 16:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- IMDb.com - Almost unanimously considered unreliable - primarily user-edited with no vesting of edits.
- Though, based on the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches it can be used for cast and awards information. That said, I would put in the stipulation that any "cast" info only be cited if the episode has already aired. IMDb is generally good about fixing cast mistakes afterward, but they're also good about posting rumored cast positions that never come to fruition. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
- Lesser known online stores
Final outcome[edit]
| Name | Medium | Type | Notes and limitations | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variety | online; print | General information on television; no apparent restrictions on usage | Go to News archives become patchier deeper into the past | Reed Business Information |
Discussion[edit]
I've added some links to the list. TV.com is generally considered unreliable, typically because it's user generated, but I think that it may be beneficial if we create a list of both reliable and unreliable sources, both of which explain why. This way we can always point to this page (or another page if this content is moved somewhere else) as a reference for anyone who questions the reasoning. Also, it maybe be good to point out when an otherwise unreliable source might be considered "okay" for use in an article (e.g., a fansite webmaster goes to the ComicCon and gets an exclusive interview with a TV exec., etc.) BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)