Preferred source types
Taxonomic databases, museum collections, government wildlife agencies, conservation assessments and peer-reviewed research are preferred for claims within their areas of expertise. Zoo and university species guides can provide useful synthesis when they identify their scope clearly.
News reports may be used for documented public events, such as the 2013 blobfish poll, but they do not replace biological evidence for anatomy, range or conservation status.
One citation should not support an unrelated paragraph
Sources are selected claim by claim. A taxonomy source may establish the accepted scientific name, while a different field study supports behaviour or habitat.
When evidence applies to one species, the page does not automatically extend it to a whole family or common-name group. When authorities disagree, the difference is described rather than hidden.
Links, changing facts and uncertainty
Source links are checked for broken destinations during site audits. A working link does not guarantee that every claim remains current, so unstable information such as conservation status requires periodic review.
Where research is limited, the page says that the answer is incomplete. Absence of data is not filled with a plausible-sounding guess.