I got destroyed for using bad sources. Here's my new source checklist.

[PannaKaus]

Last semester, I got a paper back with a grade that made me cry. The feedback? "Many sources are not credible or scholarly." I'd used .com websites, random blogs, and one Wikipedia page (I know, I know). I felt like such an idiot.

So I made myself a source quality checklist that I now use for every research paper. Maybe it'll help someone else avoid my humiliation.

Before I use a source, I ask:

1. Is it peer-reviewed? For most academic papers, this is non-negotiable. Look for the peer-review icon in the database.
2. Is it recent? In some fields (science, tech), a source older than 5 years might be outdated. In humanities, older can be fine, but check with your professor.
3. Who are the authors? Are they affiliated with a university or research institution? What else have they published?
4. Who published it? University press? Academic journal? Government agency (.gov)? Or is it a .com trying to sell something?
5. Is it cited by others? If other scholars are citing this source, that's a good sign. Google Scholar shows citation counts.
6. Is it relevant? Does it actually support my argument, or am I forcing it in because I need another source?

Using this checklist has saved me. My last paper, my professor actually commented on my "strong source base." Small victories.

Anyone else have a source quality rule they swear by?

 

[Lester]

Peer-reviewed is great but honestly? Just use Google Scholar and limit to after 2018. Solves like 80% of the problem. Also, your library's databases usually have a "scholarly/peer-reviewed" filter checkbox—use it religiously. I'm too dumb to manually check each journal tbh

Also OP, don't feel bad about the Wikipedia thing. We've all been there. It's like a rite of passage. The important part is you learned and made a checklist. Respect.