Talk:Elephant Rock (Iceland)
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Sourcing
[edit]I am not going to do a full review, as I am not familiar enough with Icelandic topics to know if this very short article is actually broad enough or to be able to search through Icelandic sources. However, I wish to point out that Listverse is certainly not the kind of sourcing that is acceptable for a GA, and is even iffy for a B-class article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Chaotic Enby, as you can imagine, there's only so much that can be said about an elephant-resembling rock on a remote island off the coast of Iceland. Furthermore, the Listverse source was one of only two sources supporting one sentence, so it wouldn’t be an issue at GA, as it could simply be removed, and the sentence would still be referenced. The Blue Rider
20:20, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at the other sources: Times of India is "additional considerations apply", and Treehugger has been described as not reliable at WP:RSN. Asia News is now inactive, appears to have a history of running advertisements, although I am not sure how much of a dealbreaker the latter is. In general, it would be good to have sources that read less like tourist brochures and more like serious sources, as for now I am not even sure the article meets WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Times of India seems reliable for this kind of information; WP:TOI gives special caution to entertainment-related content, which is not the case. That discussion about Treehugger.com is from 2014 and a lot has happened in 10 years, check their editorial guidelines. The Blue Rider 21:04, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- WP:TOI does say that
Paid advertorials may be of particular concern in topics such as entertainment
, which doesn't exclusively limit it to entertainment. This is not the only reason why it is not considered fully reliable, as fact-checking was also explicitly mentioned. The relevant RfC shows that "reliable" is not how the community would describe the TOI even outside of entertainment-related content.Regarding Treehugger.com, while a lot might have happened in 10 years, the article is from 2019, or 5 years ago. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- WP:TOI does say that
- Times of India seems reliable for this kind of information; WP:TOI gives special caution to entertainment-related content, which is not the case. That discussion about Treehugger.com is from 2014 and a lot has happened in 10 years, check their editorial guidelines. The Blue Rider
- Looking at the other sources: Times of India is "additional considerations apply", and Treehugger has been described as not reliable at WP:RSN. Asia News is now inactive, appears to have a history of running advertisements, although I am not sure how much of a dealbreaker the latter is. In general, it would be good to have sources that read less like tourist brochures and more like serious sources, as for now I am not even sure the article meets WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
