<templatestyles src="Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources/styles.css" />

    {{Shortcut|WP:WASHINGTONEXAMINER}}
<!-- TODO: Add DISPLAYTITLE back when generating actual pages, with correct URL -->
<!-- {{DISPLAYTITLE:Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources/all/''Washington Examiner''}} -->
{{Infobox
| title            = [[Washington Examiner]]
| 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:Achtung-orange.svg|20px|No consensus|link=]] No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply
}}

There is no consensus on the reliability of the ''Washington Examiner'', but there is consensus that it should not be used to substantiate [[WP:EXCEPTIONAL|exceptional claims]]. Almost all editors consider the ''Washington Examiner'' a [[WP:PARTISAN|partisan source]] and believe that statements from this publication should be [[WP:INTEXT|attributed]]. The ''Washington Examiner'' publishes [[WP:RSOPINION|opinion columns]], which should be handled by following the appropriate guideline.

== Prior discussions ==
{{WP:RSPLinks}}

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

* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 213#Reliability of the Washington Examiner]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 218#Washington Examiner]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 229#Erick Erickson and The Washington Examiner]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 192#Washington Examiner op-eds]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 253#Washington Examiner]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 271#Sources at Media bias in the United States for claims of censorship of conservative content]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 283#Newsbusters and The Washington Examiner as sources for facts in the lead of CNN]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 285#Washington Examiner on John McAfee]]

* Simple summary of prior discussions: '''TBD'''

{{DEFAULTSORT:Washington Examiner, Perennial sources}}
==Notes==
{{notelist}}

==References==
<references />
== Original table row for comparison ==
''(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)''
{{Wikipedia:RSPTableHeader}}
|- class="s-nc" id="Washington Examiner"
| ''[[Washington Examiner]]'' {{WP:RSPSHORTCUT|WP:WASHINGTONEXAMINER}}
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|nc}}
| [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 213#Reliability of the Washington Examiner|1]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 218#Washington Examiner|2]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 229#Erick Erickson and The Washington Examiner|3]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 192#Washington Examiner op-eds|4]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 253#Washington Examiner|5]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 271#Sources at Media bias in the United States for claims of censorship of conservative content|6]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 283#Newsbusters and The Washington Examiner as sources for facts in the lead of CNN|7]] [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 285#Washington Examiner on John McAfee|8]]
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2020}}
| There is no consensus on the reliability of the ''Washington Examiner'', but there is consensus that it should not be used to substantiate [[WP:EXCEPTIONAL|exceptional claims]]. Almost all editors consider the ''Washington Examiner'' a [[WP:PARTISAN|partisan source]] and believe that statements from this publication should be [[WP:INTEXT|attributed]]. The ''Washington Examiner'' publishes [[WP:RSOPINION|opinion columns]], which should be handled by following the appropriate guideline.
| {{WP:RSPUSES|washingtonexaminer.com}}
|}