Talk:Poynter Institute

What does this command even mean?.
''This article relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources.''

This article would be better if it referenced tertiary sources? Wikipedia itself is a tertiary source. I was taught that primary sources -- eyewitnesses, people with first-hand experience -- were the best to use when writing any monograph, because they were not filtered by later writers.

If wikipedia is using an idiosyncratic definition of "primary sources," they should link to it.50.0.36.241 (talk) 16:45, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Wikipedia has an entire page which describes its policy on sources, No original research, and defines primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Tertiary sources are not necessarily ideal sources, but they can be very good sources to identify views which are fringe or not independent of the topic. Wikipedia notes that it is a tertiary source, but explicitly exempts itself as an acceptable source, because it can be edited by almost anyone at any time, which in turn means that it is not a stable or fact-checked. You are correct in stating that primary sources are the best sources for monographs, but Wikipedia is not composed of monographs; it is composed of articles which cite reliable, verifiable sources.  Horologium  (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Still needs better sourcing
I've put in 3 independent sources, though 1 is a directory type listing from Bloomberg and 2 cover the same, fairly minor event. I had a 4th that mentions the Institute in passing, but I felt it might give more depth to that event. I didn't add it because it has the same author as one of the others (so much for different viewpoints). In case anybody is interested it's

different school of course. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 22:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Poytner biases
Poytner and by extension their propaganda arm “PolitiFact” are a known Democrat organization. With many of their “fact checks” being unraveled as leaning left misinformation. 2600:1003:B85B:81E0:C8C7:2690:C226:C824 (talk) 02:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —  Newslinger  talk   04:22, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Newslinger honest question: when all the sources deemed reliable by wikipedia ultimately rely on the Poynter institure's IFCN for fact checking how can we possibly prove their bias using them? You're essentially asking us to [indirectly] cite the Poynter institute's opinion on the Poynter institute. it's extremely circular logic. it would be like asking us to prove the existance of a secret cooperation between newscorp and the nra by citing sources exclusively owned, operated or partnered with either newscorp or the nra. 87.1.18.129 (talk) 21:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Most reliable sources on Wikipedia are unrated by the International Fact Checking Network, so your argument is not valid. —  Newslinger  talk   05:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Accredited/degree-granting?
Is the school an accredited or degree-granting institution, or do they just provide training? DelTribe 13:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DelTribe (talk • contribs)

July 2024 update + custom search engine
1) noting here that I've removed some unsourced/primary-sourced material that was flagged and flagged some others for removal later if not addressed. 2) just made a custom search engine that only draws from English-language fact-checking pages of Poynter's IFCN members - feedback/ideas welcome Superb Owl (talk) 02:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)