Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Posts on Usenet are rarely regarded as reliable sources, because they are easily forged or misrepresented, and many are anonymous or pseudonymous.. One exception is that some authorities on certain topics have written extensively on Usenet, and their writings there are vouched for by them or by other reliable sources.
Reliable scholarship – Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable, where the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses.
Inclusion on the list doesn't automatically mean the absolute truth is on these websites, so always be critical and compare information between different sources. The content of the subsections is alphabetically organized. Please add free online sources if you know some that are missing in this list, but try to keep it relevant and trustworthy.
This page in a nutshell: Cite reviews, don't write them. Appropriate sources for discussing the natural sciences include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as recent peer reviewed articles in reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies, widely recognized standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or standard ...
Descriptions of women's history collections from sources in the UK, as well as women's history websites. Free London Metropolitan University: Global Health [70] Public Health Specialist abstracting and indexing database dedicated to public health research and practice. Contains scientific records from 1973 to the present. Subscription CABI: HCI ...
Potentially unreliable sources ; Reliable source examples ; Topic-specific essays. Identifying reliable sources (history) Identifying reliable sources (law) Identifying reliable sources (science) Identifying reliable sources (medicine) Identifying and using style guides (WP:STYLEGUIDES)
For a source to be added to this list, editors generally expect two or more significant discussions about the source's reliability in the past, or an uninterrupted request for comment on the source's reliability that took place on the reliable sources noticeboard. For a discussion to be considered significant, most editors expect no fewer than ...
Here's a checklist to help organize your evaluation of a source. Remember, this checklist is useful to identify whether a source is likely to be appropriate for general use in an average article. No source is always unreliable for every statement, and no source is always reliable for any statement.