Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An article about a business: The organization's own website is an acceptable (although possibly incomplete) primary ‡ source for information about what the company says about itself and for most basic facts about its history, products, employees, finances, and facilities. It is not likely to be an acceptable source for most claims about how ...
The following sources are generally considered reliable: Peer reviewed academic journals, when used in conjunction with a subject which is the journal's focus. News reports by major news organizations or wire services. Nonfiction works written by notable authors, and published by major publishing houses.
Primary source material that has been published by a reliable source may be used for the purposes of attribution on Wikipedia, but only with care, because it's easy to misuse primary sources. The Bible cannot be used as a source for the claim that Jesus advocated eye removal (Matthew 18:9 , Mark 9:47 ) for his followers, because theologians ...
A confidential source, i.e. those sources that are considered confidential by the originating publisher may hold uncertain authority, as the original cannot be used to validate the reference. A questionable source is one with no independent editorial oversight or fact-checking process, or with a poor reputation for fact-checking.
Bloomberg company and executive profiles are generally considered to be based on company press releases and should only be used as a source for uncontroversial information. There is consensus that these profiles should not be used to establish notability. Some editors consider these profiles to be akin to self-published sources. See also ...
A third-party source is a source that isn't involved in the event. The third party is generally expected to be an independent, outside observer. It is common for the third party to be neutral and even-handed, but, in some instances, the third party may have strong opinions about the event.
The same source may contain both primary and secondary material, so if this becomes an issue, it is important to be able to understand the differences. For example, a peer-reviewed medical journal article typically has four major parts. An introduction, a description of the methods used for the study, the results of the study, and a conclusion.
If your knowledge of the source is secondhand—that is, if you have read Jones (2010), who cited Smith (2009), and you want to use what Smith (2009) said—make clear that your knowledge of Smith is based on your reading of Jones. When citing the source, write the following (this formatting is just an example): John Smith (2009).