Do You Link to Your Sources?

Fantastic go through I really like to hear what actual folks want to talk about on their blogs not only compaines trying to offer things.

This cleared up much confusion for me... although I will need to review it more. So much of the blog postings on the net are clearly just people doing the best they can to share what they think needs sharing. I include myself in that category! With an academic background I understand the need for citations but realized early on that fullbown academic syle formats aren't the norm in this on-line world. So I muddle along... Maybe an update is in order? Or something simple somewhere easy to access? Thanks for this one....

I not only link to my sources but, where possible, I let them know that I have done so. Linking to my sources allows my reader to determine to their own satisfaction if those resources are reliable. I don't generally link to common resources such as the Bible or a dictionary but, with the Bible, I will nearly always use scripture citations. Where a word can be defined several ways and it is important that my reader know which definition I am using in my post, I will also link to that and specify which definition I have chosen.

If I am attempting to persuade someone with my writing, I think that it is my responsibility to give them the tools to understand what I have written and why.

Linking to sources = pingbacks

Pingbacks = good because people from the source blog will probably read your blog.

Woops! A couple mis-spellings above!

I think that sometimes there is information that is in the "common knowledge" realm in certain fields, but isn't "common knowledge" outside those fields - so sometimes sources could be cited even though if one was writing for a pier-reviewed journal one wouldn't need to.

For example, on my blog I might say that there is an ash-flow tuff exposure (a particular rock type) in a certain roadcut along Highway 50 - and there might be a source I could cite, or I could have used my own geologic knowledge to assess the outcrop before blogging about it. Usually for this type of thing, I will cite a reference if I can find one (it might not be an online reference so might have to be cited the old-fashioned way) - and other times I might just let it stand without having to do research to find out something I can tell just by stopping and looking. Possibly you might find information like that frustrating because you aren't sure whether to cite my blog or not. I do try to make it clear whether I'm using my own knowledge, experience, expertise, or memory - but perhaps I fall down on that occasionally.

Thanks for the post; it's always good to be reminded to think while blogging!

I have agonised over this question when I started writing my regular 'On this day in history' posts. I started out intending to write brief, pithy posts but within a matter of weeks I find I am writing longer posts as I explain a little of the background to the events.

Initially I didn't worry about referencing the sources in the posts because they were intended to be bite-size ephemera, now I am wondering whether I should.

I generally include something along the lines of 'for more information see such-and-such a site' on each post, with a link to what I consider to be the best of the online sources that I used to write the post.

Nevertheless, for my longer (dare I say it - more scholarly) articles, I reference all my sources.

Excellent post btw
K

@ Bobbie: There seems to be a time delay with the posting of comments here. (My first one to Dane got spamned. Then I wrote another and it got spammed. Then yours appeared. Anyway, thank you for emphasizing the point about what kind of sources we cite.

@ Rob: Of course.

Excellent. May I use this in my convergence class this summer?

Dane, I agree with both of your points. I spoke about hard news sources as a kind of shorthand for reliable sources, but I didn't want to get into that too much, because it's a topic all it's own. And yes, we acknowledge to build community. Definitely. You'll notice most of my links point to community members here, and one points to a blogger who helps put military history bloggers together.

Thank you very much for using one of my blogs as a positive example of linking for verifiability. I appreciate the recognition.

I think it is important to distinguish one kind of blog content from another in regard to the need for verifiability citations, as you have done. Standards are indeed very different for material that is either autobiographical or personal opinion, compared to material that purports to be factual or educational. Like you [speaking to Mark], I have come across information on blogs that has prompted me to ask silently, "How do you know that?" or "Where did you find out about this?" It is frustrating and sometimes annoying.

When information is presented as fact, citing the source(s) is especially important. It doesn't take much time or effort to add an "according to..." phrase to a paragraph, with a link. Dane Morgan raises a corollary issue above: the credibility of the blogger often hinges on the credibility of the sources cited.

For my three aviation news blogs, I ALWAYS cite sources. I also have a policy of consulting multiple sources before I write a news story, whenever possible. Depending on the topic, these can (and usually do) include reports from government agencies (e.g., FAA, NTSB, and their counterparts in other countries); media releases from companies, industry associations, unions, and so forth; reputable news sources catering to the aviation industry; and general news media -- more or less in that order.

As much as it is important to cite sources of information, the writer also must be able to distinguish among sources that are reliable and those that are questionable. The example I have given above has to do with aviation, but I think in most fields there exists a sort of continuum of credibility. It's good to know which are sound and which are shaky.

Regarding "hard news sources," Dane, sure. I used that phrase as a kind of shorthand for "reliable source." A lot of people blog about stuff in the news, but cite nothing, when they should be citing something from a traditional news source. You sometimes blog about trends that could very well be covered by a different kind of source. One could do a whole post on the subject of reliable sources. Here's a start: http://tinyurl.com/6nsngx

I also like the way you expand acknowledgment to community-building. That's often the point, of course. You'll notice that I cited people in two communities above. All but one of them belongs to the BlogCatalog community. The exception is a blogger and historian who is helps build the community of those who blog about military history.

I tend to avoid news outlets for verification purposes, preferring instead, .edu sources. One man's hard news source is another's Communist News Network, as an example. But even then many of the things I blog about don't lend themselves to news outlets for sources anyhow since the news outlets aren't likely to be reporting on them. Often my source is the stats I have compiled while doing certain tests of my own, which can then be verified by simply repeating the tests, though I will link .edu sources that present information about the underlying principles involved.

Akin to acknowledgment, perhaps even a part of it, the real BIG reason to link to sources for me is community. Linking to other sites, resources, tools, blogs and forum posts relating to the topic you are blogging on strengthens the community interested in that topic. It doesn't hurt that it establishes you as an expert in the field by demonstrating the depth and breadth of your research and knowledge either.

@Kobra: So do! These comments give you every opportunity. Or write a post! :p

Great! but I feel as though I could add onto it a little :P.

Mark,

You nailed it. Great post. I will be pointing to this post, as well as some others, when I do my article on Blogging Etiquette. I am starting a new blog today that will allow me to post on a variety of subjects. OutsideMyBrainAgain is dedicated to thoughts and insights relating to successful living from a Christian perspective. As I wrote that last sentance, it reads as a shameless plug, but I only mentioned that because if you went to my current site, finding an article on Blogging Ettiquette wouldn't quite fit.

Anyway... thanks for your tips!

In total agreement which is why I like to cite sources with so many of my posts.

Mark, I do link anything that I quote for the very reasons you listed. I prefer to give people the opportunity to check into the validity of my sources (when I'm writing a researched post) on their own. When I read a blog or post that quotes something out of context, and does not provide a link so that I may look into it myself, I feel as if the author is hiding some pertinent information for some reason.

Perhaps it's from years of debate, and seeing folks use sources out of context to manipulate the data to their liking that has biased me that way. ;)

Good post, Mr Stoneman!