Digital Spy

Digital Spy

(not part of original row)
source type	foobar (not part of original row)
publisher	Fooland (state-funded media) (not part of original row)
classification	Usually reliable for typical purposes

There is consensus that Digital Spy is generally reliable for entertainment and popular culture. Consider whether the information from this source constitutes due or undue weight.

Prior discussions

Please add links to other significant discussions. When in doubt, read and rely on the discussions themselves, rather than the simple summary.

• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 34#are music reviews from digital spy reliable?
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 47#digitalspy.co.uk
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 57#Digital Spy
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 62#Digital spy
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 96#Daily Mail, Digital Spy, Daily Express, and reliability for Doctor Who

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 5#Digital Spy
• Simple summary of prior discussions: TBD

Notes

References

Original table row for comparison

(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)

Perennial sources

Source	Status (legend)	Discussions			Use
		List	Last	Summary
Digital Spy WP:DIGITALSPYWP:DIGITALSPY 📌		1 2 3 4 5 A	2012	There is consensus that Digital Spy is generally reliable for entertainment and popular culture. Consider whether the information from this source constitutes due or undue weight.	1   2