{{Infobox
| title = [[XBIZ]]
| 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
}}
''XBIZ'' is considered generally reliable for the adult industry. However, it publishes press releases/sponsored content without clearly delineating the distinction between their own journalism and the promotional content of others. Thus, editors should take care that the source is not used for content obviously or likely to be promotional.
== 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.''
* Simple summary of prior discussions: '''TBD'''
{{DEFAULTSORT:XBIZ, 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-nc" id="XBIZ"
| data-sort-value="XBIZ"| [[XBIZ]]
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|nc}}
| {{rsnl|349|RfC: Adult industry sources|2021|rfc=y}}
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2021}}
| ''XBIZ'' is considered generally reliable for the adult industry. However, it publishes press releases/sponsored content without clearly delineating the distinction between their own journalism and the promotional content of others. Thus, editors should take care that the source is not used for content obviously or likely to be promotional.
| {{WP:RSPUSES|xbiz.com}}
|}