>>1102724Well the later three will give you the most accurate information. That stuff is mostly peer reviewed and suposedly replicated (take that with a grain of salt, what with the replication crisis). You can also look at the IF of the journal in which you find your information, which is a pretty good indicator of reliability.
Wikipedia is less reliable, but science related wikipedia is surprisingly decent.
4chan is a place mostly for shitposting, and you have now way of verifying the infromation you get.
Over all, my point is this shouldn't be OPs first source of information. It feels lazy to me.
