Wikipedia:Developing a list of sources that have gained consensus at an article

This is an essay on the reliable sources policy.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcut

WP:CONSOURCE

Sometimes editors at an article that is part of a contentious topic, or at a project that focusses on a topic, will find it helpful to develop a list of sources that have gained consensus as being among the best sources for that article. This is usually the result of a long discussion among multiple editors and may involve discussions of the quality of the sources, such as whether they are in peer-reviewed academic publications and how recently they were published or updated.

The advantages of developing such a list include preventing repetitive arguments over the same sources over several discussions.

Such a list should not be seen as a list of the only sources that can be used at that article. Such lists are only lists of sources where consensus has been developed, and lack of inclusion on such a list doesn't imply a source isn't usable. Other sources may require discussion to gain consensus that the source can be used for that content.

Consensus about sources can change; no list should be treated as a finished project.

Examples

Projects

Articles