{{WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources/Header}}
{{WP:RSPNutshell|gr|shortcut=}}
{{Infobox source reliability
| type = website
| shortcut = WP:IGN
| status = gr
| last = 2017
| domain1 = ign.com
}}
{{WP:RSPIntro|IGN}}
__TOC__
== Summary ==
There is consensus that ''IGN'' is generally reliable for entertainment and popular culture, as well as for film and video game reviews given that attribution is provided. Consider whether the information from this source constitutes [[WP:DUE|due weight]] before citing it in an article. In addition, articles written by N-Sider are generally unreliable as this particular group of journalists have been found to fabricate articles and pass off speculation as fact. The site's blogs should be handled with [[WP:RSBLOG]]. ''See also: {{pslink|AskMen}}.''
== Excerpt ==
{{hatnote|Excerpt from the lead of [[IGN]]:}}
{{excerpt|IGN|paragraphs=1|only=paragraphs|hat=no|references=no|inline=yes}}
== Discussions ==
{{WP:RSPLinks}}
=== Links ===
=== Recency ===
{{WP:RSPLAST/sandbox|2017|table=no}}
=== Rfcs ===
''No Rfcs for this source.''
==Notes==
{{notelist}}
==References==
== Original table row for comparison ==
''(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)''
{{Wikipedia:RSPTableHeader}}
|- class="s-gr" id="IGN"
| ''[[IGN]]'' (''Imagine Games Network'') {{WP:RSPSHORTCUT|WP:IGN}}
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|gr}}
| 12{{efn|See these discussions of ''IGN'':
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2017}}
| There is consensus that ''IGN'' is generally reliable for entertainment and popular culture, as well as for film and video game reviews given that attribution is provided. Consider whether the information from this source constitutes [[WP:DUE|due weight]] before citing it in an article. In addition, articles written by N-Sider are generally unreliable as this particular group of journalists have been found to fabricate articles and pass off speculation as fact. The site's blogs should be handled with [[WP:RSBLOG]]. ''See also: {{pslink|AskMen}}.''
| {{WP:RSPUSES|ign.com}}
|}