Determining Whether a Source is Reliable on Wikipedia
Wikipedia follows strict reliability guidelines for sources to ensure that articles are verifiable and neutral. Here’s how to determine whether a source is considered reliable on Wikipedia.
Step 1
Identify the Type of Source
Wikipedia categorizes sources into three main types:
Scholarly & Academic Sources (Usually Reliable)
Peer-reviewed journal articles
Books from reputable publishers
Government reports or official documents
Reputable News & Media Sources (Generally Reliable)
Mainstream news outlets with strong editorial oversight (e.g., The New York Times, BBC, Reuters, The Wall Street Journal)
Well-established trade publications (e.g., Harvard Business Review, The Hollywood Reporter)
Questionable or Unreliable Sources
Opinion blogs, personal websites, and self-published sources
Press releases, corporate websites, and social media (only reliable for official statements)
Sensationalist/tabloid news (e.g., New York Post, TMZ)
Shortcut: If the source is widely cited in academic research or respected media, it's likely reliable.
Step 2
Check Editorial Oversight and Fact-Checking
Wikipedia favors sources that have strong editorial controls.
✅ Reliable sources have:
Professional fact-checking and editorial review
Clear authorship and publisher reputation
Independence from the subject
🚫 Unreliable sources often have:
No clear editorial process (e.g., blogs, social media posts)
Heavy bias, conspiracy theories, or extreme partisanship
Pay-to-publish schemes (e.g., Forbes Contributor Network, PRNewswire)
Example: The Washington Post (high editorial standards) is reliable, while Infowars (conspiratorial) is unreliable.
Step 3
Evaluate Bias and Independence
News sources can have bias, but that doesn’t automatically make them unreliable.
Highly partisan sources (e.g., Breitbart, Occupy Democrats) are discouraged.
Corporate or promotional sources (e.g., company websites, press releases) are not independent from the subject and generally not useful in most circumstances.
Rule of Thumb: If a source primarily promotes or attacks a subject rather than reporting neutrally, it’s not ideal for Wikipedia.
Step 4
Verify the Information Elsewhere
A single source is rarely enough—Wikipedia prefers multiple independent sources.
✅ Reliable
Multiple independent sources confirm the same information.
🚫 Unreliable
Only one obscure source reports the claim.
The claim contradicts widely accepted research or expert consensus.
Example: A scientific discovery should be cited from peer-reviewed journals, not a lone blog post.
Step 5
Consult Wikipedia’s Guidelines and Noticeboards
If you're unsure about a source’s reliability, check:
Wikipedia: Reliable sources (WP:RS) → Guidelines on reliable sources
Wikipedia: Perennial sources list (WP:PERENNIAL) → A list of commonly debated sources and their reliability status
Reliable Sources Noticeboard (WP:RSN) → Ask experienced editors for guidance
Step 6
Apply the Information to Wikipedia Editing
Now that you’ve determined reliability:
✅ Use the source if:
It’s a high-quality, independent publication with editorial oversight.
It aligns with expert consensus and is widely cited.
🚫 Avoid or qualify the source if:
It lacks fact-checking, has extreme bias, or is self-published.
It’s only being used to push a specific point of view.
Final Tip: When in doubt, look for a better source. Wikipedia relies on the best available sources, not just any source.
Wikipedia’s Key Reliability Criteria
| Criteria | ✅ Reliable Sources | ❌ Unreliable Sources |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial oversight | Peer-reviewed journals, reputable newspapers | Self-published blogs, wikis, conspiracy sites |
| Fact-checking | Professional news orgs, academic books | Sensationalist/tabloid news, biased sources |
| Independence | Third-party coverage |
Press releases, company websites
|
| Expertise | Written by subject-matter experts |
Anonymous or non-expert sources
|
| Consensus |
Multiple sources confirm the info
|
One obscure or questionable source |
Need Help Navigating Wikipedia’s COI Policies?
Understanding and following Wikipedia’s conflict of interest (COI) and paid editing guidelines can be complex—but you don’t have to do it alone.
