Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
A reliable source is one that presents a well-reasoned theory or argument supported by strong evidence. Reliable sources include scholarly, peer-reviewed articles or books written by researchers for students and researchers, which can be found in academic databases and search engines like JSTOR and Google Scholar.
The main academic full-text databases are open archives or link-resolution services, although others operate under different models such as mirroring or hybrid publishers. . Such services typically provide access to full text and full-text search, but also metadata about items for which no full text is availa
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.
Biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge.This guideline supports the general sourcing policy with specific attention to what is appropriate for medical content in any Wikipedia article, including those on alternative medicine.
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)
Research libraries will hold paper guides to authoritative sources. The most useful is The American Historical Association's Guide to Historical Literature, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Pamela Gerardi 2 vol (1995), which is an annotated bibliography of authoritative sources in all fields of history.
In Wikipedia, these research papers are "primary sources." Hopefully, you now have a good understanding of why these papers are not reliable descriptions of reality. They shouldn't be used by the general public for anything, much less creating encyclopedic content. Now from time to time, scientists sit down and read a bunch of research papers.