For example, I would have no qualms about using the Writer Beware blog as a
source. It's an important part of the SFWA (Science Fiction Writers of
America), a notable organisation in literature. I also wouldn't have
problems with the blogs of reputed directors blogging about the filming
process of their new work or the blog at the Newsround website. Random "My
Life" blogs however, are not acceptable. Unfortunately, the distinction
isn't always easy, especially when the notability of the person writing the
blog (about themselves) is in question.
Self-published books aren't neccesarily bad sources either. I've heard about
2 guys who are writing a jazz encyclopedia and publishing it on Lulu. It
might be a self-published source, but it won't promote their opinion. I'd
see no harm in using their work as a source and I'm sure I'd have the same
feelings with other self-published books.
On 10/19/06, Rob <gamaliel8(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/19/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Blogs are often self-serving or a platform for
People using self-published sources are usually out to promote their
instead of offering an unbiased article. These
rules seem pretty clear
non-contradictory to me.
And often they are part of the reporting of a reputable news
organization. Self-published blogs should be treated like
self-published books, news blogs from a reputable news organization
should be treated like other material from that reputable news
Sorry for the hijack, but I just keep seeing the simplistic
formulation of blog=bad over and over again, either by people who
parrot policy and can't distinguish the two, or by people who use
policy to further their agendas.
WikiEN-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: