On 3/27/07, Denny Colt <wikidenny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/27/07, John Lee <johnleemk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...
Actually the three examples preceding the blog example would probably
not
be
considered reliable sources either, as they are self-published.
Obviously,
however, this is ludicrous for, say, people like
Jakob Nielsen. If their
books are citable, why shouldn't their self-published works (especially
on
the same topics) be citable as well?
Johnleemk
Huh? If the book is published normally, and as a *book* is a fine source,
but then the author turns around and just freely releases the SAME book
online or via a newspaper or Readers Digest or whatever, why would the
SAME
material not be a bad source? It's the same material by the same person.
Ah, I was thinking of the typical e-book, i.e. something someone typed up in
MS Word, converted into PDF format, and then put up on his site. (I've
written an ebook myself, but I wouldn't dream of using it as a source for
any article...) If what you had in mind is similar to what Philip Greenspun
has done (he republishes his books on his website after they hit the
bookstores), then there shouldn't be an issue.
The important question is whether the material is self-published, because if
it is not subject to editorial vetting, it's no good as a secondary source -
and as a tertiary source, WP is not in the business of publishing material
from primary sources, unless these sources have been utilised by secondary
sources.
Johnleemk