Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Deprecated sources are highly questionable sources that editors are discouraged from citing in articles, because they fail the reliable sources guideline in nearly all circumstances. Use of these sources may generate edit filter warnings for registered users and may be automatically reverted for edits from IP addresses.
Edit-filtered: An edit filter, is in place to warn editors who attempt to cite the source as a reference in articles. The warning message can be dismissed. The warning message can be dismissed. Edits that trigger the filter are tagged .
"Deprecation is not a blanket ban - although deprecated sources are "generally prohibited", there may be acceptable uses for a deprecated source, e.g., permissible WP:SPS or WP:BLPSELFPUB usages. But, although there are exceptions, they are extremely rare. In almost all cases, the deprecated source should not be used at all, even where ...
If the source is unreliable for a reason other than obsolescence, use {{Better source}} instead. If no citation is given, use {{Citation needed}}. If the source given is self-published, use {{Self-published inline}}. If you think the author has a conflict of interest or is otherwise too close to the subject, use {{Third-party inline}}.
Some sources attempt mainly to state what the law itself says. Some other sources attempt to state the effect of the law, such as a source about social effects or impacts arising from the implementation of a law, a source about a policy recommendation that in someone's opinion should be embodied in a law, a source about the legislative process, or a source on constitutional history.
In general English usage, the verb "to deprecate" means "to express disapproval of (something)". It derives from the Latin deponent verb deprecari, meaning "to ward off (a disaster) by prayer". An early documented usage of "deprecate" in this sense is in Usenet posts in 1984, referring to obsolete features in 4.2BSD and the C programming ...
For a source to be added to this list, editors generally expect two or more significant discussions about the source's reliability in the past, or an uninterrupted request for comment on the source's reliability that took place on the reliable sources noticeboard. For a discussion to be considered significant, most editors expect no fewer than ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more