Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Five references are provided early on: two textbooks, a specialized monograph on aldol reactions, and two review articles. Most readers would assume that the bulk of the statements in the comparatively short Wikipedia article could be verified by checking any of these references, and so it may only be necessary to provide additional in-line references for controversial statements, for recent ...
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.
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 ...
In case of multiple possible references for a statement, the best reliable sources should be used. Quotations: Add an inline citation when quoting published material, whether within quotation marks or not, whether using direct or indirect speech. When using footnotes, the citation should be placed in the first footnote after the quotation.
{} for references to general websites {} for newspapers and news websites {} for references to books {{cite journal}} for magazines, academic journals, and papers; A template window then pops up, where you fill in as much information as possible about the source, and give a unique name for it in the "Ref name" field.
The Scite Reference Check bot is an extension of scite.ai that scans new article PDFs "for references to retracted papers, and posts both the citing and retracted papers on Twitter" and also "flags when new studies cite older ones that have issued corrections, errata, withdrawals, or expressions of concern". [40]
For example, a paper reviewing existing research, a review article, monograph, or textbook is often better than a primary research paper. When relying on primary sources, extreme caution is advised. Wikipedians should never interpret the content of primary sources for themselves ( see Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point ...
Footnotes with list-defined references Shortened footnotes Citations can also be placed as external links , but these are not preferred because they are prone to link rot and usually lack the full information necessary to find the original source in cases of link rot.