 | 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: Amazon is considered  generally unreliable. See § Summary. |
| type | website |
|---|---|
| shortcut | WP:RSPAMAZON |
| status | generally unreliable |
| deprecated | no |
| blacklisted | no |
| recency | 2021 |
| Domain amazon.com | |
| In source code Spamcheck tool | |
Amazon is a source that has been repeatedly discussed at the Reliable sources noticeboard. This page collects and links information about previous discussions and current consensus, and summarizes it here for convenience.
Summary
editUser reviews on Amazon are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all. While Amazon itself is a reliable source for basic information about a work (such as release date, ISBN, etc.), it is unnecessary to cite Amazon when the work itself may serve as a source for that information. Future release dates may be unreliable.
Excerpt
editDiscussions
edit
Notes
editReferences
editOriginal table row for comparison
edit(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)
| Source | Status (legend) |
Discussions | Use | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| List | Last | Summary | |||
| Amazon WP:RSPAMAZON 📌 |
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
2021 |
User reviews on Amazon are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all. While Amazon itself is a reliable source for basic information about a work (such as release date, ISBN, etc.), it is unnecessary to cite Amazon when the work itself may serve as a source for that information. Future release dates may be unreliable. | |
