Rolling Stone (culture)

Rolling Stone
logo (not part of original row)
source typefoobar (not part of original row)
publisherFooland (state-funded media) (not part of original row)
classification Usually reliable for typical purposes

There is consensus that Rolling Stone has generally reliable coverage on culture matters (i.e., films, music, entertainment, etc.). Rolling Stone's opinion pieces and reviews, as well as any contentious statements regarding living persons, should only be used with attribution. The publication's capsule reviews deserve less weight than their full-length reviews, as they are subject to a lower standard of fact-checking. See also Rolling Stone (politics and society), 2011–present, Rolling Stone (Culture Council).

Prior discussions

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

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
    Rolling Stone (culture)
    WP:ROLLINGSTONEWP:ROLLINGSTONE 📌
    WP:ROLLINGSTONECULTUREWP:ROLLINGSTONECULTURE 📌
    Generally reliable Request for comment 2021 Stale discussions

    2021

    There is consensus that Rolling Stone has generally reliable coverage on culture matters (i.e., films, music, entertainment, etc.). Rolling Stone's opinion pieces and reviews, as well as any contentious statements regarding living persons, should only be used with attribution. The publication's capsule reviews deserve less weight than their full-length reviews, as they are subject to a lower standard of fact-checking. See also Rolling Stone (politics and society), 2011–present, Rolling Stone (Culture Council). 1 Links Spamcheck