Sources: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly - Graduate Writing Center

Nested Applications
Sources: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Sources: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly


Ever scrolled through headlines and noticed sensationalism? Do you have a few news sources that you trust more than others? Do you read Wikipedia articles when you want to find out the basics of something (like most of us)?

As you know from your experience consuming media in everyday life, not all sources of information are equal. Generally, the more rigorous the editing process a publication goes through, the more reliable it is likely to be:

  • The average Facebook post or tweet, for example, is written by just one person; for most academic purposes, such sources of information would therefore be lowest on the reliability scale.

  • Likewise, while Wikipedia is great for finding basic knowledge, in most cases, the information has not been peer-reviewed or edited by experts, so its accuracy has not been verified. (Tip on Wikipedia, though: more and more of the entries contain footnotes, which can be great to find further information in more reliable sources!)
     
  • By contrast, a book published by an academic press is screened by many specialists in the field and is likely to be much more reliable.

Here's a more extensive list of some standard sources, in order of least to most likely to be reliable: 

  • Tweets / Facebook post (least reliable: written by one person or a bot and immediately publishable)
     
  • Blog entry (usually longer than a social media post; you can generally find out more about the writer's credentials)
     
  • Info from a dot-com website (remember, dot coms are often selling something)
     
  • Newspaper article (online or print; remember, newspapers are also trying to sell themselves)
     
  • Magazine article (similar to newspaper articles, though magazines tend to publish less frequently, giving more time for editing)
     
  • Info from a dot org site (usually not trying to sell anything, but still, check source credentials)
     
  • Info from a dot edu site or dot gov site (usually more reliable than a dot com site)
     
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed journal articles are vetted by experts in the field)
     
  • Book published by an academic press (goes through an extensive editorial process)

There are many characteristics to consider when evaluating the quality of a source; to review key concepts, see our introduction to graduate school research and writing from the quarterly Foundations of Academic Writing presentation. 

Evaluating Sources Links

A–Z content heading

Writing Topics A–Z


This index links to the most relevant page for each item. Please email us at writingcenter@nps.edu if we're missing something!

A–Z content menu

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

A

abbreviations

abstracts

academic writing

acronyms

active voice

adjectives, compound

advisor, selecting and working with

AI

apostrophes

appointment with GWC coaches, how to schedule

argument

article usage

artificial intelligence

assignments, understanding them

audience

return to top

B

body paragraphs

booking an appointment with a GWC coach

brackets, square

brainstorming

return to top

C

capitalization

citations

charts

ChatGPT

citation software

citation styles

clauses

clarity

clustering

coaching, about

coaching, how to schedule

colons

comma splices

commas, FANBOYS

commas, introductory

commas, list

commas, nonessential / nonrestrictive information

commas, Oxford

commas, serial

common knowledge

commonly confused words

compare-and-contrast papers

compound adjectives / modifiers

concision

conclusions

conference presentations

conjunctive adverbs

coordinating conjunctions

copyright and fair use

critical thinking

return to top

D

dangling modifiers

dashes

dependent clauses

dependent marker words

display equations

distance learning

double submission of coursework

drafting

Dudley Knox Library

return to top

E

editing your own work

editing: outside editors

em dash

en dash

equations

exclamation points

executive summary

return to top

F

FANBOYS

FAQs

figures

first person, use of in academic writing

footnotes

fragments

free-writing

return to top

G

generative artificial intelligence (AI)

gerunds

grammar

graphics

graphs

group writing

GWC appointment, how to schedule

return to top

H

homophones

Honor Code, NPS

human subjects research

hyphens

return to top

I

ibid.

incomplete sentences

independent clauses

Institutional Review Board

interviews, conducting

introductions

IRB

iThenticate

return to top

J

Joining the Academic Conversation

return to top

L

LaTeX

library liaisons

lists, syntax of

literature reviews

logic and analysis

return to top

M

M dash

making a GWC appointment

mathematics

memos

methodology

modifiers, compound

modifiers, misplaced

return to top

N

N dash

nominalizations

note-taking

noun clusters

numbers

return to top

O

organization

outlining

Oxford comma

return to top

P

paragraph development

parallelism

paraphrasing

parentheses

parts of speech

passive voice

periods

persuasion

phrases vs. clauses

plagiarism, how to avoid

plagiarism-detection software

plain language

polishing

prepositional phrases

prepositions

pronouns, clarity with

pronouns, grammar of

proofreading

publishing

punctuation

return to top

Q

questionnaires, administering

questions

quotation marks

quoting

return to top

R

Reading with Intent I

Reading with Intent II

redundancies

reference software

reflection papers

research

research guides, discipline-specific

research questions

restrictive vs. nonrestrictive information

reusing papers

reverse outlining

revision

roadmaps

run-on sentences

return to top

S

scheduling a GWC appointment

self-citing

semicolons

sentence fragments

serial comma

signal phrases

significance

so what?

source blending

sources, engaging with / critiquing

sources, evaluating the reliability of

sources, citing

spelling

standard essay structure

STEM / technical writing

Strategic Reading I

Strategic Reading II

style

subject–verb agreement

subjects, grammatical

subordinating conjunctions

summarizing

surveys, administering

return to top

T

tables

teams, writing in

technical writing

tense

that vs. which

thesis advisor, selecting and working with

thesis process overview

Thesis Processing Office (TPO)

thesis proposals: common elements

thesis statements

thesis writing

this, that, these, those

tone, professional

topic sentences

transitions

types of papers

return to top

U

United States or U.S.?

return to top

V

verbs and verb tense

return to top

W

which vs. that

why write?

writer’s block

writing in groups / teams

writing process

return to top

Z

Zotero

return to top