Revision as of 19:01, 22 December 2023 edit Woodroar (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 18,628 edits →‎Confusion with primary source: Reply Tag: Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:03, 22 December 2023 edit undo Banks Irk (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 1,754 edits →‎NYT yet again: Not the time or place Next edit →
Line 709: :::That Tweet does not say any things about Accuracy. [[User:Slatersteven\|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven\|talk]]) 18:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC) :This is a tweet about more tweets. I would expect much better sources that they e.g. truly fire people for specifically being "against genocide" to consider anything. It's pervasive in this subject area for a person to say something incredibly inflammatory, then when facing consequences claim that they were punished for a much less objectionable stance. <span style="font-family:Palatino">[[User:Crossroads\|'''Crossroads''']]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Crossroads\|-talk-]]</sup> 18:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC) *Read the notices at the top of the page. Do you have an actual question about the reliability of the NYT as a reference to support a specific statement in a specific article at en.wikipedia? It appears not. [[User:Banks Irk\|Banks Irk]] ([[User talk:Banks Irk\|talk]]) 19:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions