Search results
There is a page named "Wikipedia talk:Book sources/Archive 1" on Wikipedia
- the books ISBN from the Book Sources page on Wiki, sometimesthe viewer will land on a page on worldcat, and it will state the book is not available in any...87 KB (12,771 words) - 18:52, 16 May 2024
- from Wikipedia talk:Book sources. It matches the following masks: Wikipedia talk:Book sources/Archive <#>, Wikipedia talk:Book sources. This page was last...28 KB (39 words) - 02:55, 31 July 2024
- was a page where he could make a note of a poor source, because of some errors he found in a book. [1] It got me wondering whether we could set up a page...151 KB (24,064 words) - 18:33, 7 April 2023
- redlightgreen is a free tool for citing sources and can also be used to gather ISBN numbers for each specific edition of a book (shows all editions). it can reference...92 KB (14,681 words) - 13:23, 4 February 2023
- rchType=5&referrer=02_001_Search.aspx Dear friends; testwiki:project:Book sources, ro:project:Surse de cărţi and yi:project:דרויסנדיקע ליטעראַטור ISBN...26 KB (3,292 words) - 13:09, 4 February 2023
- different book sources. The ISBN of the 2016 book Communism: The Great Misunderstanding, by Gennady Ermak, is 9781533082893. The Book Sources page for...77 KB (9,139 words) - 12:54, 30 July 2024
- discussions on talk WP Medicine have asked: Are primary sources better than secondary sources? In particular, editors who cite papers covering basic science...216 KB (33,056 words) - 17:31, 22 June 2022
- articles as sources…": surely this is much too strong. They are not considered citable sources, but they are perfectly legitimate sources when writing...216 KB (33,447 words) - 09:34, 26 March 2022
- mailing list archives. It’s not even unique to online sources. It's therefore better addressed in a more appropriate section. Clearly, many sources are reliable...247 KB (38,886 words) - 15:03, 9 March 2023
- 21:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC) Exactly right... using the "best" sources is a goal... not a requirement. The requirement is for "appropriate" sources. Blueboar...186 KB (28,318 words) - 17:24, 4 February 2023
- (UTC) Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Overview Source reliability falls on a spectrum: highly reliable sources, clearly unreliable sources, and many in the middle...198 KB (22,657 words) - 17:07, 20 March 2023
- reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources." WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC) WhatamIdoing...57 KB (7,659 words) - 01:35, 23 August 2024
- the sources you want here are called "secondary" sources, not "third-party" sources. Actually, Wikipedia IS a third-party source or tertiary source: http://www...252 KB (37,495 words) - 14:15, 28 January 2023
- expired 4 years ago, but it still operational via http. Nyuhn (talk) 20:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC) Webcat Plus ended their service on 31 March. See Webcat Plus...3 KB (190 words) - 16:02, 30 July 2024
- vol. 1. I have the CD and would like to citate the source. It only tells you have to citate books and documents. Well, you can just use {{cite book}}, clarifying...43 KB (6,052 words) - 02:38, 5 September 2023
- sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability state the reason for limiting Self-published sources is that, "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published...227 KB (34,800 words) - 07:59, 9 May 2022
- c) 23:34, 1 March 2014 (UTC) Both Wikipedia:BookSources and Wikipedia:Book Sources are redirects to the true page, Wikipedia:Book sources. When an edit...69 KB (8,147 words) - 19:57, 28 February 2023
- comes essentially from one book, but presumably it will grow and other sources will be cited. In my experience, if sources are not cited when the material...35 KB (5,717 words) - 20:22, 21 March 2020
- third-party sources. I would go one step further, by making it say "Any article on a topic is required to cite at least two reliable sources, independent...136 KB (19,477 words) - 15:03, 4 February 2023
- indicating primary sources and secondary sources is desirable in my opinion. Perhaps you would agree? Nixdorf 20:39, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC) I like Rbellin's...34 KB (5,530 words) - 13:25, 4 February 2023
- ARCHIVED Hmm... most sources I see say the EO #1 was on February 14, 1862. I have also seen the date of October 20, 1862, per snippets in this book and
- primary sources can give editors the incorrect idea that speeches are primary sources and can be quoted without a published source. w:Primary sources suggests
- Programming/Contributors lounge/Archive 1 moved to Wikibooks talk:WikiProject Ada/Archive 1 Talk:Ada Programming/Contributors lounge/Archive 2 moved to Wikibooks