twitter
58
edits
What are good sources to cite?: Difference between revisions
→Recognize Good sources
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Two hallmarks of a bad source are unreliable authors and unverifiable credentials. Their content is often driven by the average internet user and cannot be trusted. Some examples of such pages are ''Blogs, Personal Websites,'' and ''Wikipedia''. | Two hallmarks of a bad source are unreliable authors and unverifiable credentials. Their content is often driven by the average internet user and cannot be trusted. Some examples of such pages are ''Blogs, Personal Websites,'' and ''Wikipedia''. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
There are many websites and tools out there that help writers create good citations | There are many websites and tools out there that help writers create good citations. Indiana University has published a [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM4Abds7I6k YouTube video] that helps writers identify good sources. Correctly formatting your citations is also essential in creating good citations. Many students enjoy using [http://easybib.com/ EasyBib], a tool that formats sources into MLA style for free. | ||
== Peer-Reviewed Articles== | == Peer-Reviewed Articles== | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Scholarly Articles == | == Scholarly Articles == | ||
Sometimes it can be difficult to determine | Sometimes it can be difficult to determine whether a source is "scholarly" but there are a questions to ask that can help determine a website's academic worth. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
'''How to Identify a Scholarly Source'''<ref>UCF Library, ''What is a Scholarly Source''. University of Central Florida, 2013</ref> | '''How to Identify a Scholarly Source'''<ref>UCF Library, ''What is a Scholarly Source''. University of Central Florida, 2013</ref> | ||
* | * Is it published by a Scholarly Association or society, or a university, or recognized scholarly publisher? | ||
* Are articles reviewed in some way? | * Are articles reviewed in some way? | ||
* Are the articles written for an academic audience or a popular audience? | * Are the articles written for an academic audience or a popular audience? | ||
* Are the citations clear and abundant? | * Are the citations clear and abundant? | ||
* | *Is it published by a university press or other academic publisher? | ||
*Is it a textbook? If it is written for classroom use, it is not a scholastic source. It is intended as a learning tool, but the textbook references can help you find other sources. | *Is it a textbook? If it is written for classroom use, it is not a scholastic source. It is intended as a learning tool, but the textbook references can help you find other sources. | ||
== Using Wikipedia == | == Using Wikipedia == | ||
Students everywhere love to look to Wikipedia for answers. This is all well and good, but can Wikipedia be an appropriate source? There are many different policies on this and writers should always check with their supervisor before relying on Wikipedia. One thing that Wikipedia can give everyone is a jumping off point. Most wiki articles have many sources and writers can check out their sources and adopt them into their paper. It also allows authors to quickly gain a basic understanding of the subject they are writing on | Students everywhere love to look to Wikipedia for answers. This is all well and good, but can Wikipedia be an appropriate source? There are many different policies on this and writers should always check with their supervisor before relying on Wikipedia. One thing that Wikipedia can give everyone is a jumping off point. Most wiki articles have many sources and writers can check out their sources and adopt them into their paper. It also allows authors to quickly gain a basic understanding of the subject they are writing on if they are unfamiliar with it. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
Using Wikipedia as a source is a very controversial topic because it is able to be edited by anyone. The site has many fail-safes to keep errors to a minimum and usually succeeds. There is, however, no guarantee that when you go to the "American Civil War" wiki page you won't read that the south won and then proceeded to destroy Venus.<ref>Raphael, JR, ''The 15 Biggest Wikipedia Blunders''. PC World, 2008</ref> | Using Wikipedia as a source is a very controversial topic because it is able to be edited by anyone. The site has many fail-safes to keep errors to a minimum and usually succeeds. There is, however, no guarantee that when you go to the "American Civil War" wiki page you won't read that the south won and then proceeded to destroy Venus.<ref>Raphael, JR, ''The 15 Biggest Wikipedia Blunders''. PC World, 2008</ref> | ||