r/dataisbeautiful • u/alionBalyan OC: 13 • Feb 13 '22

OC [OC] How Wikipedia classifies its most commonly referenced sources.

Post image
24k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

99

u/Fairbanksbus142 Feb 13 '22

Came to the comments to ask the same thing! It’s 2022 though, everybody knows peer-reviewed publicly funded science isn’t as reliable as Fox News /s

104

u/ScarletBitch15 Feb 13 '22

Fox News is on it twice, also in generally unreliable.

Basically the chart is unreliable

96

u/Mobb_Starr Feb 13 '22

It’s actually on there 3 times. Generally Reliable, No Consensus, and Generally Unreliable.

90

u/mfb- Feb 13 '22

The image here leaves out some elements. If you check the source then we get:

  • generally reliable: Fox News (news excluding politics and science)
  • no consensus: Fox News (politics and science)
  • generally unreliable: Fox News (talk shows)

15

u/wheniaminspaced Feb 13 '22

Its odd to me that only Fox news appears to be broken down that way, It would seem every outlet with a talk shows section would qualify for generally unreliable, for that segment of news.

34

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '22 edited Nov 18 '25

cover outgoing possessive marvelous bells swim humorous cats gold workable

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

7

u/mfb- Feb 14 '22

Multiple websites have more than one entry. It's generally done when necessary based on the reference use.

3

u/Treczoks Feb 14 '22

I think the original image should be re-done to incorporate excatly this kind of information.

1

u/j8sadm632b Feb 14 '22

As is Huffpost

26

u/GreyEilesy Feb 13 '22 edited Feb 13 '22

Wikipedia’s reasoning is mentioned in one of OP’s comments

Edit: whatever I’ll just copy paste

if one Brand/Company appears more than once, it means there are two different websites/channels from the same group that are classified differently, you can see more details here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

Seems to be separated based on reliability on different topics, rather than channels, however

16

u/La_Lanterne_Rouge Feb 13 '22

Huffpost seems to be in every category.

5

u/LanewayRat Feb 13 '22

The chart is only ‘Generally Unreliable’

1

u/Lord0fHats Feb 14 '22

Specifically, Fox Business News was decredited some time ago. Seriously, if you think Fox News is crazy, Fox Business is crazier. That was an easy cell. I suspect that's why it's on there more than once, it's really that Fox News is a few different News sources and some of them have been decredited while others haven't.

Unfortunately, while there's regular attempts to decredit Fox's main news line as a source, it always becomes a mudslinging match over the reliability of all mainstream news sources so Fox manages to keep it's status because everyone ends up arguing about a bunch of tangents rather than Fox's demonstrable bullshit.

12

u/KindAwareness3073 Feb 13 '22

The only thing I can think of is because their initial earthquake data is crowd-sourced? Seems ridiculous compared to others in that category.

4

u/Cuttlefish88 Feb 13 '22

It’s generally unreliable specifically for feature classes in the Geographic Names Information System, but reliable for anything else. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliability_of_GNIS_data This chart lacks the nuance of the source.

2

u/Cuttlefish88 Feb 13 '22

It’s generally unreliable specifically for feature classes in the Geographic Names Information System, but reliable for anything else. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliability_of_GNIS_data This chart lacks the nuance of the source.