DOKUMEN123.COM

WP:BIASEDSOURCESWP:BIASEDSOURCES WP:ACCORDINGTOWP:ACCORDINGTO WP:RSBIASWP:RSBIAS Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However...

allowed to be as promotional (or anti-promotional) as they want per WP:RSBIAS. What matters is whether there's information in those sources that we can...

is a reliable source per WP:RSPAI, reliable sources can be biased per WP:RSBIAS. Additionally, essay on independent sources says, A source can be biased...

the primary endorsers directly per WP:PRIMARY to avoid issues under WP:RSBIAS. Oiloiloil3 (talk) 09:18, 19 February 2026 (UTC) The source used [11] appears...

May 2026 (UTC) You are mixing up independent (politician) with WP:RSBIAS. From RSBIAS: Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view...

When it comes to being biased, I believe articles can be biased too per WP:RSBIAS; unless I’m interpreting the policies wrong. The article about the father...

29 January 2026 (UTC) Are the apologetic journals unreliable sources? WP:RSBIAS says reliable sources can be biased (towards islam in this case). the authors...

Nobody (talk) 09:41, 3 March 2025 (UTC) WP:NEWSORG, WP:RSOPINION, and WP:RSBIAS are all going to apply. It's editorials should be handled with caution,...

discussions about reliability, bias is not a factor in reliability (see WP:RSBIAS). Handling different sources the same because they reflect different sides...

that makes me skeptical Forbes is that pro-business, having a pro-business RSBias would not stop it from being reliable as long as the facts that they do...

even extreme bias isn't a reason to consider a source unreliable, see WP:RSBIAS. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 14:29, 27 January 2026 (UTC) If we...

with stronger fact-checking reputations (BBC, Reuters, AP, etc.) Per WP:RSBIAS bias on its lonesome is not disqualifying, but topic-specific unreliability...

--NoonIcarus (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC) Option 2 (intext attribution) WP:RSBIAS and WP:RSOPINION cover most of the points here. Jacobin publishes opinions...

article's Talk page have mentioned pro-government bias but as RSN knows (and WP:RSBIAS shows) that is impertinent for us, also cf. genrel but biased sources at...

have no place here (especially as sources are allowed to be biased (WP:RSBIAS)). Such sites can be useful to find information about a source, but they...

the tweet, see WP:ABOUTSELF. Algemeiner is a WP:NEWSORG, so standard WP:RSBIAS and WP:RSOPINION apply. There been little discussion of it in the archives...

45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 00:18, 10 April 2026 (UTC) WP:RSBIAS mentions Bias may make in-text attribution appropriate. What is an example...

Obviously all the normal policies and guidelines apply (NEWSORG, RSOPINION, RSBIAS, HEADLINES). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 19:18, 17 August 2024...

08:57, 4 July 2025 (UTC) The only thing WP:RS has to say about this is WP:RSBIAS, simply bias is not a reliability issue but one of NPOV. What the bias of...

(UTC) The bias of a source has nothing to do with it's reliability, see WP:RSBIAS, and sources are not judged against each other but on their own merits....

WP:RSOPINION on the difference between opinion peices and news eeporting, and WP:RSBIAS on dealing with sources that may not always be neutral (all news organisation...

reporting of the war, but being biased isn't a factor in reliability (WP:RSBIAS). There are many state owned news media organisations , and some of them...

reliable. The usual points about opinion pieces (WP:RSOPINION) and bias (WP:RSBIAS) apply. As a Indian news organisation articles that are overly positive...

not make a source unreliable, Wikipedia even has policy saying so (see WP:RSBIAS). MSNBC saying bad things only about replublicans, or Fox only saying bad...

expert it would be reliable per WP:SPS, and bias does not mean unreliable WP:RSBIAS. How and if it should be included in the article is a WP:NPOV matter, but...

whether a source is reliable or not, sources are allowed to be biased (see WP:RSBIAS). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:14, 26 December 2025 (UTC) Hi...

allowed to be as promotional (or anti-promotional) as they want per WP:RSBIAS. What matters is whether there's information in those sources that we can...

is completely irrelevant, bias isn't reliability as per policy (see WP:RSBIAS). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:25, 10 February 2026 (UTC) We...

might be biased, but that (and intext attribution) is already covered by WP:RSBIAS. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC) I think...

(UTC) WP:RSOPINION would already cover opinion/editorial pieces, and WP:RSBIAS doesn't immediately make a source unreliable. Saying immigration is bad...

current disagreement about the source? Biased doesn't mean unreliable, per WP:RSBIAS. A lot of pro-Putin / Russian state media is considered unreliable, but...

with bias, but biased the sources aren't necessarily unreliable (see WP:RSBIAS). Instead the solution is to find other sources that add balance. WP:NEWSORG...

wikipedia. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 04:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Please review WP:RSBIAS. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC) If something...

(talk) 02:10, 10 January 2026 (UTC) Sources are allowed to be biased per WP:RSBIAS and their political leaning is irrelevant when it comes to judging their...

source is entirely irrelevant. Sources are allowed to be biased, see WP:RSBIAS. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 06:20, 10 January 2026 (UTC) Thanks...

aren't relevant not reliability, sources are allowed to be biased (see WP:RSBIAS). What's needed is evidence of mistakes, especially if they're allowed to...

17:31, 23 September 2025 (UTC) A standard WP:NEWSORG, has an obvious WP:RSBIAS in relation to the UK's relation with the EU. WP:RSOPINION should be attributed...

show why they should be considered unreliable the normal WP:NEWSORG/WP:RSBIAS/WP:RSOPINION of dealing with standard news organisations apply. I read through...

(talk) 15:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC) Sources are allowed to be biased per WP:RSBIAS. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC) Sceince-Based Medicine has...

Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC) My point was more about WP:RSBIAS, which is that we should be careful about the context in which we use biased...

Wikipedia editor have some diversity. As to partisan sources you should read WP:RSBIAS, the "Beware 'partisan sources'!" point is not one of reliability but NPOV...

WP:USEBYOTHERS[58] and would probably be covered by WP:NEWSORG. Issues of bias (WP:RSBIAS) and opinion (WP:RSOPINION) don't immediately make a source unreliable....

than friendly towards Iran, but biased doesn't mean unreliable (see WP:RSBIAS). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:40, 25 September 2025 (UTC)...

involved reporting. Remember bias doesn't make a source unreliable, see WP:RSBIAS. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC) Some...

1969. Both appear quite political, but bias doesn't mean inaccurate (WP:RSBIAS). It contains quotes from General Massu that he witnessed Bigeard committing...

(UTC) It is true that Nigerian news outlet like their Western counterparts (RSBIAS?) do publish opinions, promotional and advertorials like reliable news without...

group A investigates former/anti-A members". It's probably a case of WP:RSBIAS, rather than being unreliable. As a more general statement, I would accept...

on their sleeve, but bias doesn't automatically mean unreliable (per WP:RSBIAS). Note in BLPs they might not life up to Be very firm about the use of high-quality...

them to get the article content right, but readers don't seem to care. WP:RSBIAS (which explicitly permits citing biased sources) is one of our rules, and...

source, depending on its content, but it wouldn't preclude their use. Per WP:RSBIAS biased sources are not unreliable, but they should be handled in a way that...

volumes, and even then bias is not a factor in judging reliability (WP:RSBIAS). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 19:41, 12 November 2025 (UTC) That...

appears to be some reporting not bias but bias doesn't mean unreliable WP:RSBIAS. I case would need to be made to show they're not reliable. The specific...

Wikipedia considers bias or opinion in reliability matters it doesn't, see WP:RSBIAS and WP:RSOPINION. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:08, 3 January...

is reliable, but it is demonstrably progressive, which can affect its WP:RSBIAS depending on context. Based on the discussion over at Talk:Ainsley Earhardt...

it (80%) came from USAID[19], but any bias isn't a reliability issue (WP:RSBIAS). If they are doing investigative journalism I would suggest attribution...

When it comes to being biased, I believe articles can be biased too per WP:RSBIAS; unless I’m interpreting the policies wrong. The article about the father...

too. (WP:MEDRS) Reliable sources are not required to be impartial. (WP:RSBIAS) We follow the proportion of reliable sources. (WP:NPOV) We treat uncontested...

October 2025 (UTC) Even for BLPs RS aren't required to be unbiased per WP:RSBIAS however we do have to take greater care and this source sounds like a step...

is a reliable source per WP:RSPAI, reliable sources can be biased per WP:RSBIAS. Additionally, essay on independent sources says, A source can be biased...

been said by others. The issues you brought up are about bias, and per WP:RSBIAS Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However...

29 January 2026 (UTC) Are the apologetic journals unreliable sources? WP:RSBIAS says reliable sources can be biased (towards islam in this case). the authors...

having a political position, but sources are not required to be neutral (WP:RSBIAS). What was left is correctly summarised by the close. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested...