| This page is a test version of a potential new layout for the Perennial sources project. It is a demo and not part of the live listings. See Talk. |
| This source in a nutshell: The Dorchester Review is considered |
| Type | website |
|---|---|
| Status | |
| Deprecated | no |
| Blacklisted | no |
| Recency | 2024 |
| Domain dorchesterreview.ca | |
| In source code Spamcheck tool | |
| RfC | |
| Link | Rfc |
| Date | 2024 |
There is consensus The Dorchester Review is generally unreliable, as it is not peer reviewed by the wider academic community. It has a poor reputation for fact-checking and lacks an editorial team. The source may still be used in some circumstances e.g. for uncontroversial self-descriptions, and content authored by established subject-matter experts.
The Dorchester Review, founded in 2011, is a semi-annual journal of history and historical commentary that describes itself as a non-partisan but "robustly polemical" outlet for "elements of tradition and culture inherent to Canadian experience that fail to conform to a stridently progressivist narrative."
2024
(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)
| Source | Status (legend) |
Discussions | Use | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| List | Last | Summary | |||
| The Dorchester Review |
2024 |
There is consensus The Dorchester Review is generally unreliable, as it is not peer reviewed by the wider academic community. It has a poor reputation for fact-checking and lacks an editorial team. The source may still be used in some circumstances e.g. for uncontroversial self-descriptions, and content authored by established subject-matter experts. | 1Â | ||