Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

(not part of original row)
other names	FAIR
source type	foobar (not part of original row)
publisher	Fooland (state-funded media) (not part of original row)
classification	No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply

There is no consensus on the reliability of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. However, there is strong consensus that publications from FAIR should not be used to support exceptional claims regarding living persons. Most editors consider FAIR a biased or opinionated source whose statements should be attributed and generally treated as opinions.

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 16#FAIR.org
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 64#FAIR (again); article that has already led to one defamation lawsuit being used as a reference
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 64#FAIR; RS for contentious BLP edits and statements of fact?
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 112#FAIR.org
• WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 169#Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)

• 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
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)		2010	2014	There is no consensus on the reliability of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. However, there is strong consensus that publications from FAIR should not be used to support exceptional claims regarding living persons. Most editors consider FAIR a biased or opinionated source whose statements should be attributed and generally treated as opinions.	1