WikiQueer:Independent sources


 * WQ:IS redirects here. For what WikiQueer is, use WQ:WIS

Independent sourcing is an expansion of points in WikiQueer:Verifiability and gives the opinion of some editors on why independent sourcing is required on WikiQueer. Its aim is to note that: "Any article on a topic is required to cite a reliable source independent of the topic itself, to warrant that an article on the topic can be written from a neutral point of view."

Summary
An independent source is a source that has no significant connection to the subject and therefore describes it from a disinterested perspective. Independent sources have editorial independence (advertisers do not dictate content) and no conflicts of interest (no potential for personal, financial, or political gain from the publication).

For example, in the case of a website, an independent source would be newspaper coverage of the site rather than the site itself; for a recording artist, an independent source would be a professional review of the artist rather than album sleeve notes or a press release.

Material available from sources that are self-published, or primary sources, or biased because of a conflict of interest can play a role in writing an article, but it must be possible to source the majority of information to independent, third-party sources. Reliance on independent sources ensures that an article can be written from a balanced, disinterested viewpoint rather than from the subject's own viewpoint. It also ensures articles can catalogue a topic's worth, its role and achievements within society, rather than offering a directory listing or the contents of a sales brochure.

Articles that don't reference outside sources should be tagged with third-party and if there ultimately prove to be no independent sources, the article should be listed for deletion.

Explanation
WikiQueer strives to be of the highest standard possible, and to avoid writing on topics from a biased viewpoint. WikiQueer:Verifiability was created as an expansion of the neutral point of view policy, to allow information to be checked for any form of bias. It has been noticed, however, that some articles are sourcing their content solely from the topic itself, which creates a level of bias within an article. Where this primary source is the only source available on the topic, this bias is impossible to correct. Such articles tend to be vanity, although it is becoming increasingly hard to differentiate this within certain topic areas.

If WikiQueer is, as defined by the three key content policies, an encyclopaedia which summarises viewpoints rather than a repository for viewpoints, to achieve this goal, articles must demonstrate that the topic they are covering has been mentioned in reliable sources independent of the topic itself. These sources should be independent of both the topic and of WikiQueer, and should be of the standard described in WikiQueer:Reliable sources. Articles should not be built using only the subject itself as sole source. This requirement for independent sources is so as to determine that the topic can be written about without bias; otherwise the article is likely to fall foul of our vanity guidelines.

Examples
These simple examples need to be interpreted with all the facts and circumstances in mind. For example, a newspaper that depends on advertising dollars might not be truly independent in their coverage of the local businesses that advertise in the paper.

Indiscriminate sources
Merely being independent does not guarantee that a source is reliable for a given purpose. Some sources, while apparently independent, are indiscriminate. For example, a travel guide might attempt to provide a review for every single point of interest, restaurant, or hotel in a given area. A newspaper in a small town might write about the opening and closing of every single business in the town, or the everyday activities of local citizens. Indiscriminate sources are poor indicators of notability and should be considered skeptically when determining due weight.

Similarly, independent sources may be outdated, self-published, or not have a reputation for fact-checking.