Editing Eurovision Wiki:Teahouse (section)

== Verifiable Source Question ==

Hello, I am drafting a wikipedia article page for an academic and they have at least 3 sources from news outlets that have significant coverage from independent reliable sources. But a contact of mine, who is more versed in writing wikipedia pages than I am, mentioned that the sources should not contain interview material of the academic themselves, since the articles contain too much of their own words? Is this true? I am finding it very hard to use any news article that does not contain interview material. Also, in terms of other citations can I use conference websites that establish this academic is a subject matter expert who did a panel talk on a particular academic topic, or use their peer-reviewed research papers? What about using a university commencement program to verify where they got their degree or a university directory webpage? I know web content is not a valid source but links to online research papers, university directories, and conference event panels seem more valid than general web content. They prove this person is a legitimate subject matter expert and demonstrates their credentials. Just want to have a clearer sense of what is approved for citations before submitting. Thanks! [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-90335-3|&#126;2026-90335-3]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-90335-3|talk]]) 20:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

:Hello, @[[User:~2026-90335-3|~2026-90335-3]], and welcome to the Teahouse. 
:Yes, it is true. 
:{{HD/WINI}}
:Almost all of the sources used should be completely independent of the subject - anything based on an interview or press release is not independent. Almost anything from their university is going to be a [[WP:primary source|primary source]] - usable for verifying uncontroversial factual information, but not helping to establish that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:notability|notability]]. "Web content", on the other hand is just the delivery method, and may or may not be reliable, depending on who published it. 
: See [[WP:golden rule]] for the criteria that the majority of the sources should meet. 
:My earnest advice to new editors is to not even ''think'' about  trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as [[WP:verifiability|verifiability]], [[WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view]], [[WP:42|reliable, independent sources]], and [[WP:notability|notability]], and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the [[WP:BRD|Bold, Revert, Discuss]] cycle), then you might be ready to read [[WP:your first article|your first article]] carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 21:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
:"for an academic" could mean "about an academic", or "on behalf of an academic". If it's the latter, please read [[WP:BOSS]] and share that with them, and read and abide by [[WP:COI]] and [[WP:PAID]]. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 08:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)