Talk:Perennial sources list

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Perennial sources list article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page was proposed for deletion by Cinaroot (talk · contribs) on 14 May 2025.
It was contested by Newslinger (talk · contribs)

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 May 2025. The result of the discussion was keep.

On 20 May 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved from Reliable sources/Perennial sources to Perennial sources list. The result of the discussion was moved.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Reliability

This article is part of WikiProject Reliability, a collaborative effort to improve the reliability of Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ReliabilityWikipedia:WikiProject ReliabilityTemplate:WikiProject ReliabilityReliability

AfD?

This page about the WP:RSP essay-class page, containing quotes originating on WP:RSP and wikivoice statements based on what it claims, seems to me incompatible with WP:DUE + Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid + WP:SOAP + WP:CIRC. But do others think it merits WP:AfD (articles for deletion)? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any policy or guideline violations here, considering this is an article about Wikipedia, just like any of the other articles in Category:Wikipedia. The article content cites coverage from reliable secondary sources, and not the list itself. — Newslinger talk 08:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've listed the article at WP:AfD (Articles for Deletion): Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 19:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noting

There might be potential sources under "This project page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:" at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Btw, I think it would be ok if we used "RSP" for "Reliable sources/Perennial sources" in the article body. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:25, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've designated "RSP" as an alternative name in the first sentence, and replaced the full article title with RSP after the first use in the lead section and in the article body. Thank you for maintaining that {{Press}} list. — Newslinger talk 09:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page title

"Reliable sources/Perennial sources" does reflect what the literal page title is, but I am not sure people actually call it that, so much as it's an artifact of the page being a subpage. I have heard it more referred to as "RSP" or "Perennial sources" or the "Perennial sources list". Harej (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with changing the article title to "Perennial sources list", and I am requesting a page move below. — Newslinger talk 04:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RSP is taken, but I think that's more a insider term. RSP (Wikipedia) might be an ok redirect. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 May 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources/Perennial sources → Perennial sources list – While the current article title "Reliable sources/Perennial sources" is used by some sources to refer to the article subject, it is not concise and it also has the disadvantage of looking like the actual project space page (Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources) if the reader does not read the title carefully or understand how Wikipedia namespaces work.

"Perennial sources list" would be a more concise name that is just as precise as "Reliable sources/Perennial sources". "Perennial sources list" has been used as a shorter way to refer to the list by reliable sources, including a 2023 ACM conference paper, a 2025 ACM journal article, a 2024 book published by Rowman & Littlefield, Ars Technica (RSP entry), the Jewish Journal, and Windows Central. — Newslinger talk 04:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think it's an improvement (Harrison calls it "list of so-called Perennial Sources" [1]), though I'm open to hearing more suggestions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per @Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Isi96 (talk) 08:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Propose Wikipedia perennial sources and support this as well as the one originally proposed. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 13:19, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Paprikaiser (talk) 20:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: per nom and Gråbergs Gråa Sång. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Propose Wikipedia's perennial sources list. I think it's important to have "Wikipedia" in the title. Including the word "list" matches sources and makes the subject clearer. The title could be displayed with internal italics: Wikipedia's perennial sources list. Possessives in titles are rare, and all other pages with "Wikipedia's" in the title are redirects, but I'm not sure how to avoid the possessive in this case. Jruderman (talk) 04:29, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can have that as a redirect, but "Wikipedia's" doesn't seen that necessary to me since atm there are no other "Perennial sources list". That said, this source [2] actually calls it that. And, the articles at Category:Wikipedia content mostly has Wikipedia in the title. I'm ok with this suggestion too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.