MarketPerennial sources list
Company Profile

Perennial sources list

The perennial sources list is a community-maintained list on the English Wikipedia that classifies sources by degrees of reliability. It was established in 2018. The ratings, which are determined through public discussion and consensus, have received significant news coverage.

Contents
The perennial sources list catalogs sources under five categories: • Generally reliable: These sources must be "independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". The Times and its sister paper The Sunday Times, The Guardian, and The NationMarginally reliable: Sources categorized as having "no consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply" with regard to reliability. the Jewish Virtual Library, NGO Monitor, the Daily Kos, and BroadwayWorld The Grayzone, MintPress News, Newsmax, and GrokipediaTabloid newspapers such as The Sun, and The Points Guy, ZoomInfo, and Natural News the New York Post is considered marginally reliable for entertainment-related topics and generally unreliable for non-entertainment topics, Some sources have also been both deprecated and blacklisted, such as Breitbart News, and state-sponsored fake news websites such as SouthFront and NewsFront. In 2022, the East StratCom Task Force reported that pro-Russian disinformation websites were being cited on the Russian, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, and Vietnamese Wikipedias, despite being blacklisted on the English Wikipedia. == Notable ratings ==
Notable ratings
Daily Mail In February 2017, after a formal community discussion, editors on the English Wikipedia banned the use of the Daily Mail as a source in most cases. and it can no longer be used as proof of notability. The Daily Mail thus became the first deprecated source. A February 2017 editorial in The Times on the decision said: "Newspapers make errors and have the responsibility to correct them. Wikipedia editors' fastidiousness, however, appears to reflect less a concern for accuracy than dislike of the Daily Mails opinions." Slate writer Will Oremus said the decision "should encourage more careful sourcing across Wikipedia while doubling as a richly deserved rebuke to a publication that represents some of the worst forces in online news." In July 2020, the Wikipedia community announced that Fox News would no longer be considered "generally reliable" in its reporting of science and politics, and that it "should be used with caution to verify contentious claims" about those topics. The decision was made because Fox News downplayed the COVID-19 pandemic, because of allegations that it spread misinformation about climate change, and because it reported on the false concept of "no-go zones" for non-Muslims in British cities. The decision did not affect Fox News's reliability on other topics. In 2022, the Wikipedia community announced that Fox News would be considered "marginally reliable" in its reporting on science and politics. This meant that it cannot be used as a source for "exceptional claims" and that its reliability would be decided on a case-by-case basis for other scientific and political claims. The decision applies only to articles on Fox News's website and articles about topics that are scientific or political. The CNET incident resulted in editors expressing concern about the reliability of Red Ventures–owned websites, such as Bankrate and CreditCards.com, which also published AI-generated content around the same time. The ADL condemned the downgrade, alleging it was part of a "campaign to delegitimize" the organization. The Wikimedia Foundation said in response, "The Foundation has not, and does not, intervene in decisions made by the community about the classification of a source". James Loeffler, a professor of modern Jewish history at Johns Hopkins University, said the English Wikipedia's decision was a "significant hit" to the ADL's credibility. Dov Waxman, professor of Israel Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that if "Wikipedia and other sources and the journalists start ignoring the ADL's data, it becomes a real issue for Jewish Americans who are understandably concerned about the rise of antisemitism". Mira Sucharov, a professor of political science at Carleton University, said the decision was "a sign that the Jewish community needs better institutions". == Impact ==
Impact
RSP affects whether sources are cited and how they are summarized in Wikipedia articles. According to political scientist Sverrir Steinsson, by classifying the reliability of news sources, "Wikipedia has accepted the use of contested labels and taken sides on contested subjects, ultimately producing a type of content that is distinctly anti-pseudoscience and anti-conspiracy theories, and which has the perception of a liberal bent in U.S. politics". This led to discontent and departures among the "pro-fringe camp" of Wikipedia editors, which Steinsson defined as "Editors who were more supportive of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and conservatism". A 2023 Association for Computing Machinery conference paper found that the median lifespan of a source citation on English Wikipedia decreased by over two-thirds after the source was designated as deprecated or blacklisted on RSP. Wikipedia editors who are pop culture fans have created lists of sources that are structured similarly to RSP but focus on specific topic areas, such as video games. These topic-focused lists are maintained by WikiProjects that evaluate sources using both Wikipedia's reliability guidelines and supplemental subject-related criteria created by the WikiProjects themselves. When a niche source that is designated as "reliable" in a topic-focused list receives sufficient attention, the source is added to RSP and listed alongside mainstream generalist sources. == Reception ==
Reception
While the debates are public and archived, critics have said it is not clear who the volunteer editors are and how they are vetted. In 2020, Omer Benjakob of Haaretz stated that with RSP, "Wikipedia offers greater transparency and a much better model for fighting disinformation than any social media platform has yet to do, simply by building a community of fact-checkers dedicated to keeping the site accurate". == See also ==
tickerdossier.comtickerdossier.substack.com