Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources/all/CounterPunch
 | This page is a test version of a potential new layout for the Perennial sources project. It is a demo and not part of the live listings. See Talk. |
 | This source in a nutshell: CounterPunch is considered  generally unreliable. See § Summary. |
| type | website |
|---|---|
| shortcut | WP:COUNTERPUNCH |
| status | generally unreliable |
| deprecated | no |
| blacklisted | no |
| recency | 2022 |
| Domain counterpunch.org | |
| in source code spamcheck tool | |
| Domain counterpunch.com | |
| in source code spamcheck tool | |
| RFC | |
| link | Rfc |
| date | 2022 |
Summary
[edit]CounterPunch is a left-wing political opinion magazine. Despite the fact that the publication has an editorial board, there is no effective editorial control over the content of the publication, so articles should be treated as self-published sources. As a consequence, the articles should generally be avoided and should not be used to establish notability unless published by subject-matter experts writing about subjects within their domain of expertise, in which case they may be considered reliable for facts. Citing CounterPunch for third-party claims about living persons is not allowed. All articles on CounterPunch must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, in particular for due weight, and opinions must be attributed. Some articles in the publication promote conspiracy theories and historical denialism, but there was no consensus to deprecate the outlet based on the most recent RfC.
Excerpt
[edit]CounterPunch is a left-wing online magazine. Content includes a free section published five days a week as well as a subscriber-only area called CounterPunch+, where original articles are published weekly. CounterPunch is based in the United States and covers politics in a manner its editors describe as "muckraking with a radical attitude".
Discussions
[edit]Links
[edit]- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 2#Counterpunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 10#CounterPunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 84#Democracy Now! and CounterPunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 110#CounterPunch reliability
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 126#CounterPunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 181#What is the verdict of the 2008 discussion on Counterpunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 216#Counterpunch & The Daily Beast
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 217#Is CounterPunch a reliable source ?
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 289#CounterPunch BLP
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 355#CounterPunch and Al Bawaba
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 363#De-deprecate CounterPunch
- WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 355#David Price writing in CounterPunch an Edward Said
Recency
[edit]2022
Rfcs
[edit]- 2021 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 355#RfC: CounterPunch
- 2022 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 367#Deprecation RfC: CounterPunch
Original table row for comparison
[edit]| Source | Status (legend) |
Discussions | Use | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| List | Last | Summary | |||
| CounterPunch WP:COUNTERPUNCH 📌 |
|
 2021 2022
+12[a] |
2022 |
CounterPunch is a left-wing political opinion magazine. Despite the fact that the publication has an editorial board, there is no effective editorial control over the content of the publication, so articles should be treated as self-published sources. As a consequence, the articles should generally be avoided and should not be used to establish notability unless published by subject-matter experts writing about subjects within their domain of expertise, in which case they may be considered reliable for facts. Citing CounterPunch for third-party claims about living persons is not allowed. All articles on CounterPunch must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, in particular for due weight, and opinions must be attributed. Some articles in the publication promote conspiracy theories and historical denialism, but there was no consensus to deprecate the outlet based on the most recent RfC. | 1   2
|