Wikipedia:Guidelines for Citing Self-published Blogs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This Wikipedia page is currently inactive and is retained primarily for historical interest. Per Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines: "A historical page is any proposal for which consensus is unclear, where discussion has died out for whatever reason. Historical pages also include any process no longer in use, or any non-recent log of any process. Historical pages can be revived by advertising them. "
If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you should seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

Purpose: The purpose of this guideline is to set minimum standards for the citation of self-published blogs or content on websites. Any content that meets these standards could be considered for inclusion in an article. Whether they are actually included or not would have to be considered on an article by article basis, just like any other material.

Contents

[edit] Coverage

The content covered by these guidelines include blogs where each post is attributed to an identifiable person or persons via a by-line or other claim to ownership. Websites which feature anonymous shared blogging space, or on which groups make statements or post running commentary not attributed to individuals, fall outside the scope of these guidelines. Also, any blog where the content is attributed to an anonymous screenname with no other identification will also be considered outside the scope of these guidelines.

[edit] Criteria

[edit] Verifiability

Being able to reasonably verify who wrote the blog is necessary to being able to source it as a primary source. The blog should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. The blog is part of a credible site: a news agency, magazine, or other company; and the blog or postings are clearly identified as belonging to the named individual.
  2. The blog is part of a notable and credible special interest site and the blog or postings are clearly identified as belonging to the named individual.
  3. The blog is part of a site owned by the person(s) in question, and is established as their own words.
  4. The blog is clearly identified on a credible site as belonging to that person(s). For example John Smith's biography on www.examplenewscompany.com identifies that he keeps a blog at livejournal and provides a link or other identifying method.

[edit] Relevance

See WP:V#Self-published_sources_.28online_and_paper.29 for Professional Researchers and Journalists.

Establishing relevance to the article in question is necessary for citation. The individual should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. The individual is the subject of the article;
  2. The individual is a verifiable employee of the company which is the subject of the article;
  3. The individual is a prominent individual in the industry or field which is the subject of the article;
  4. The individual is a widely-acknowledged expert on the subject of the article.

[edit] Scope

Some blogs may be used to cite facts and others may be used to cite opinions. Blogs used as the source for cited facts should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. The blog is written by the subject of the article;
  2. The blog is written by an individual who has a controlling stake in a company, project, band, product, etc. which is the subject of the article.

Blogs which are to have opinions about subjects cited from them should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. The individual is a verifiable employee of the company which is the subject of the article;
  2. The individual is a prominent individual in the industry or field which is the subject of the article;
  3. The individual is a widely-acknowledged expert on the subject of the article.

[edit] Additional Notes

These are some additional points that have been raised about the citation of blogs in articles.

  • Blogs as op-eds — The point has been raised that certain blogs by credible journalists can be seen as opinion columns from the newspaper. (This covers journalist's blogs as opinions, not journalist's blogs reporting new facts.) Their content is not presented as facts of anything other than the writer's view on a given subject and can be used only as a primary source (i.e. as a source for an article that discusses the blog itself, or the writer of the blog).
  • All blogging mediums are equal — If an individual meets the criteria, the site or method from by which they choose to blog should not matter. Bill Gates' opinion on Linux would be equally valuable whether he posted it blog style to a part of the Microsoft website or whether he made it known he had a livejournal and posted the same thing there.
  • Link repositories — Websites that contain no significant, self-published content and solely link to, or include third-party content are not blogs by this definition nor covered by these guidelines — move to the third-party content, and cite it directly.
  • Blogs as Further Reading — These guidelines do not address a blogs appropriateness for linking at the end of an article as part of a "See Also", "Further Reading" or "External Links section". That is still covered by existing policies and guidelines as well as any restrictions imposed by the consensus of the editors on that particular article.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/u/i/Wikipedia%7EGuidelines_for_Citing_Self-published_Blogs_d3b5.html"