Tardis:Citation in articles about living people: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{moss|To limit legal liability, it's important to be '''very careful''' when writing articles about people who are still alive. Any controversial or negative statements should be rigorously vetted and thoroughly cited with [[T:OOU SRC|reputable sources]].}} | {{moss|To limit legal liability, it's important to be '''very careful''' when writing articles about people who are still alive. Any controversial or negative statements should be rigorously vetted and thoroughly cited with [[T:OOU SRC|reputable sources]].}} | ||
{{sc|T:LIVING PEOPLE}} | {{sc|T:LIVING PEOPLE}} | ||
Although all articles should be as accurate as possible, special care must be taken with regards to articles on people that are currently alive, as issues such as libel may arise if claims are made without sources being given, or unnecessary rumours sparked. If you choose to include information of a potentially controversial nature, a [[T:OOU SRC|reliable out-of-universe source]] must be given, such as an interview, newspaper or magazine article. Wikipedia, [[Twitter]] and the Internet Movie Database, not being peer reviewed, are ''not'' considered reliable sources. Nor are online (and, occasionally, print) sources that | Although all articles should be as accurate as possible, special care must be taken with regards to articles on people that are currently alive, as issues such as libel may arise if claims are made without sources being given, or unnecessary rumours sparked. If you choose to include information of a potentially controversial nature, a [[T:OOU SRC|reliable out-of-universe source]] must be given, such as an interview, newspaper or magazine article. Wikipedia, [[Twitter]] and the Internet Movie Database, not being peer reviewed, are ''not'' considered reliable sources. Nor are online (and, occasionally, print) sources that cite Wikipedia and IMDb as their main sources. | ||
A good example of a well-sourced article about a person | A good example of a well-sourced article about a person involved in a controversy is '''[[George Entwistle]]'''. | ||
Although this Wikia site is not considered part of Wikipedia, we endorse [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|Wikipedia's approach to this issue]]. If you see an unsourced claim or comment regarding a living person, if a source cannot be located, it is best to play it safe and remove that material from the article. | Although this Wikia site is not considered part of Wikipedia, we endorse [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|Wikipedia's approach to this issue]]. If you see an unsourced claim or comment regarding a living person, if a source cannot be located, it is best to play it safe and remove that material from the article. | ||
Revision as of 14:08, 16 November 2012
|
Prefixes → What does a citation mean? → WebRef → Citation in articles about living people |
Although all articles should be as accurate as possible, special care must be taken with regards to articles on people that are currently alive, as issues such as libel may arise if claims are made without sources being given, or unnecessary rumours sparked. If you choose to include information of a potentially controversial nature, a reliable out-of-universe source must be given, such as an interview, newspaper or magazine article. Wikipedia, Twitter and the Internet Movie Database, not being peer reviewed, are not considered reliable sources. Nor are online (and, occasionally, print) sources that cite Wikipedia and IMDb as their main sources.
A good example of a well-sourced article about a person involved in a controversy is George Entwistle.
Although this Wikia site is not considered part of Wikipedia, we endorse Wikipedia's approach to this issue. If you see an unsourced claim or comment regarding a living person, if a source cannot be located, it is best to play it safe and remove that material from the article.
