Talk:Reliable Sources
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editThe end of the first paragraph needs to be rewritten, as the text references Howard Kurtz by last name only without prior mention. Apace361 (talk) 16:06, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
sputnikmusic
editIs http://www.sputnikmusic.com/ a reliable site? The paid staff must approve any reviews published, so wouldn't those reviews count as reliable sources? The Wikipedia article for them at Sputnikmusic#Reviewer_stratification says Contributing Reviewers "are acknowledged as being good writers who generate content of a high quality." They don't just let anyone submit something. Whether you are paid as a writer, or volunteer, that shouldn't matter. A paid editorial staff still approves everything and these are professionally written reviews. Dream Focus 23:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- This article is aout the CNN program "Reliable Sources." I think you may have been thinking about Wikipedia's reliable sources noticeboard: try putting your question there: WP:RSN. Drrll (talk) 23:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Whoops! How'd I mess that up? Sorry, ignore that then. Dream Focus 01:39, 23 July 2011 (UTC)