Wikipedia talk:WikiProject IRC/Sources

This page exists to discuss the question of sources which appear at first to be unreliable, according to WP:RS, but which can be assessed to be reliable by either citations by reliable sources, or established expertise in a field.

Proposed steps
What has worked so far are these steps: --Lexein (talk) 10:18, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Find a source to support a claim, and determine its applicability (whether it truly supports the claim made), and determine its reliability per WP:RS.
 * 2) If the source's reliability is in question, determine if other, definitely reliable sources (books, magazines) have used, listed, quoted, or cited that source.
 * 3) Find if there is a scholarly path, by which scholarly sources can elevate a source's reliability by direct recommendation or dependence upon that source. Postgraduate textbooks fall into this category, but not, apparently, undergraduate textbooks, per prior RSN discussion. But one RS merely listing or using a source once seem not to suffice.
 * 4) Determine if the source's expertise provides a foundation for its reliability. This can include quotation or citations of the source by multiple other RS, authorship of published works (articles, books) by the source, or by recognition in the industry. If a source's expertise is established this way, it's currently not covered by Wikipedia reliable source policy, but by WP:Ignore all rules, IMHO we can assert that a source's expertise establishes reliability in a specific topic area.