 | Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Rappler. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please feel free to change this material in light of new discussion. |
Q1: Is Rappler considered as a reliable source of information?
A1: Rappler is considered a reliable source according to the consensus of multiple discussions about Rappler on the reliable sources noticeboard (see discussions 1, 2, and 3). This however, does not include Rappler's Voices section, which contains crowdsourced opinion pieces. As such, articles from Rappler's other sections do not pose any issues with the article's neutral point of view or Wikipedia's policy on original research.
Q2: Can Rappler be used as a primary source on information about Rappler?
A2: Wikipedia allows the use of primary sources for an article's subject matter. This is further clarified by Wikipedia guidelines which state that an organization's own website is a reliable source for basic information and facts about the organization, its history, its people, and its ownership. However, it is considered as an incomplete primary source, and therefore, non-primary reliable sources are recommended in other aspects where there may be a conflict of interest.
In short, Rappler's own website is a reliable but incomplete source about Rappler itself, and citations from reliable sources other than Rappler itself are encouraged for topics that evaluate the organization or its actions.