{{Shortcut|WP:DEBRETTS}}
{{Infobox
| title = [[Debrett's]]
| image = [[File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-en.svg|100px|alt=logo]] ''(not part of original row)''
| label2 = source type
| data2 = foobar ''(not part of original row)''
| label3 = publisher
| data3 = Fooland (state-funded media) ''(not part of original row)''
| label5 = website
| data5 =
| label6 = classification
| data6 = [[File:Yes Check Circle.svg|20px]] Usually reliable for typical purposes
}}
There is consensus that Debrett's is reliable for genealogical information. However, their defunct "People of Today" section is considered to be not adequately [[WP:IS|independent]] as the details were solicited from the subjects. Editors have also raised concerns that this section included paid coverage.
== Prior discussions ==
{{WP:RSPLinks}}
''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 60#"Debrett's People of Today"]]
* Simple summary of prior discussions: '''TBD'''
{{DEFAULTSORT:Debrett's, Perennial sources}}
==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="Debrett's"
| [[Debrett's]] {{WP:RSPSHORTCUT|WP:DEBRETTS}}
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|gr}}
| {{rsnl|297|Debrett's|2020|rfc=y}}
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2020}}
| There is consensus that Debrett's is reliable for genealogical information. However, their defunct "People of Today" section is considered to be not adequately [[WP:IS|independent]] as the details were solicited from the subjects. Editors have also raised concerns that this section included paid coverage.
| {{WP:RSPUSES|debretts.com}}
|}