I've read numerous SE questions that are based on information provided by unreliable sources. Examples:
- There have been SE questions about immigration based on data provided by the anti-immigration think tank "Center for Immigration Studies," whose claims have been debunked many times.
- There have been SE questions about white farmer genocide in South Africa based on data provided by AfriForum, which is alleged to be a White Supremacist organization.
I've provided answers to these questions. In both cases, my answer rightly scrutinized the credibility of these unreliable sources. In the replies to my answers, I've been attacked for scrutinizing these unreliable sources. Further, in the white genocide question, the replies to my answer attacked MY sources, which were the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Guardian, (three sources which collectively have many Pulitzer Prizes for journalism) and Wikipedia.
These replies suggest to me that bad sources are good (and can be used to support a claim and must be beyond scrutiny) and good sources are bad (and must be attacked at face value without even a link to support the claim that they are bad).
Does stackexchange have any guidelines regarding acceptable sources? Also, do I have any recourse to report replies that are bad faith attacks on good sources? Or would this sort of report be going too far?