|
||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
I've just removed from German Shepherd some content cited to perfectdogbreeds.com, on the grounds that that is not a reliable source (it's registered to an anonymous entity in Cheshire, England). I've also recently removed from the same page content cited to yourpurebredpuppy.com and dogster.com, for the same reason – these are random internet websites with no reputation for accuracy or reliability, and not remotely suitable for use as sources for Wikipedia. I'd like to suggest that as a matter of urgency we should start a list of such unusable sites, with a view to removing them in short order from any article that cites them, and setting up filters that would prevent them from being added anywhere in Wikipedia; and also make a start on a more difficult task, that of identifying some sources for which there is consensus that that they are to be considered reliable by our standards.
As a very small start, I propose deprecation of:
and recognition as reliable of
Is this worthwhile? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion, general agreement |
---|
Agreed. JLAN and Cavalryman, I regard a website as being only reliable as the sources its cites. Many of these websites (above) have no author taking responsibility for the content, do not cite sources, and are basically anonymous opinion pieces. I am in favour of removing anything they have to offer, and encourage Project members to grasp the nettle and commence their deletions from all dog-related articles. William Harristalk 00:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply] |
More bad sites |
---|
Cavalryman (talk) 11:10, 26 May 2020 (UTC).[reply] And more today:
Cavalryman (talk) 01:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC).[reply] And a few more:
Cavalryman (talk) 06:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Some more today:
Cavalryman (talk) 23:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] I would like to add another that I assumed was already here:
Cavalryman (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC).[reply] A couple more:
|
Please see the main list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dogs/Reliable sources for potential updates. We should probably make a more prominent link to that page. Atsme 💬 📧 16:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have started to remove from articles, will tick as complete. This will likely require review again. Cavalryman (talk) 22:23, 14 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]
I would like to propose two websites containing a number of very informative articles as "good sources":
Both authors have been published widely in dog publications and Hancock in particular has a number of published books on dogs. Both websites contain a number of articles, most of which have previously been published in magazines but some may not have been. I think both meet the criteria under WP:RSSELFas"produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications"
. Cavalryman (talk) 22:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]
As a note, you can permanently prevent those mylittlepuppy.com not-sources from being added to articles at WP:BLACKLIST. It's a bit of an extreme measure though, so only use if if there's a problem with a site being persistently added. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is an RfC on the origin of the Aidi dog breed listed here: Talk:Aidi#RfC_on_breed_origin Traumnovelle (talk) 06:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a discussion at the template on whether the parameter should be retained or removed. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jack Russell Terrier has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]