User:Alternativity/Blacklist

This is where I keep a convenient link to community discussions in which various sites have been identified as unreliable sources.

The Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard is at WP:RSN

Outright policy violations

• Geni.com - Is not considered a Reliable Source for Wikipedia articles because it uses User Generated Content. For the relevant policy please see: WP:USERGENERATED.

Consensus Established

• watawat.net - A discussion on the reliability of watawat.net was already discussed and resolved in 2011. The relevant discussion is at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_97#.22Lakandula.27s_Flag.22_is_speculative.

• globalsources.org as a source for Philippine prehistory and protohistory - A discussion on the reliability of globalsources.org as a source for Philippine prehistory and protohistory took place in December 2016, and the consensus was that while globalsources.org is often a reliable source for contemporary military topics, it isn't generally reliable as a source for Philippine history. The specific page "History-Tondo" was noted unreliable given it didn't cite its sources and seemed to use dated language. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_217#globalsecurity.org_as_a_source_on_Philippine_Prehistory_and_Protohistory.

• "The Soils of the Philippines" By Carating,Rodelio B., Raymundo G. Galanta, and Clarita D. Bacatio. - This was brought up with the Philippine Wikimedia community in 2017, with the consensus that it should NOT be used as per WP:CIRCULAR. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines/Archive40#.22The_Soils_of_the_Philippines.22_as_a_History_of_the_Philippines_Source

Discussion Ongoing

• I am not currently watching any ongoing discussions

Established Hoax

Keeping a link to the WP:NOR discussion of the Luzon Empire Hoax here, for future use: Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard/Archive_4#Luzon_Empire_and_Ancient_Tondo