Talk:Cover letter/Archives/2020

Citation for additions

Moved from User talk:Richard-of-Earth/Archive 1 § Quick Question

Hi Richard, there's a question related to this [1] edit. The article does have a "blog" word in URL but it's just a list of articles of a well-known service, which is not a private or self-published blog. So it doesn't seem to violate this rule. Goo3 (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

@Goo3: the link you gave does not work, The reason we do not use self published sources is they are not peer reviewed. I overlook that if the self published source is from a published expert like a professor at one of the major universities, but it depends on the use. If it is a list of articles, use one or more of the listed articles as a source. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 16:46, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Richard-of-Earth, sorry Richard, I gave you a wrong diff, here's the correct one. I've used an article from the list as a source. It's neither a blog nor a self-published source. They've just had "blog" in the URL, dunno why, though it's an articles' list. Thanks for the explanations, I'll use the article as a source then. Goo3 (talk) 04:44, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Goo3: now that I see what you are talking about I can better comment. First I am moving this conversation to the article talk page so others can participate. I do want to thank you for trying to improve the article, however these citations will not do. The point I made was your citations need to be peer-reviewed. You will note the other citations for this article come from Virginia Tech, MIT and Martin John Yate who is a recognized expert on career matters with over 40 books to his name. Your first citation is from an online English tutor on a site that is selling her services and the second is from a French article that does not mention its author although the site seems reputable. There is no evidence either article is academically reviewed. The text you want to add mentions "studies". Please cite those studies. Here is a link to Google Scholar. I am reverting your addition again. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Correction, the French article does mention the author, but I do not see any indication of his credentials on the site or after googling his name. The French article does not seem to mention any studies. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:31, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Richard-of-Earth, that makes sense, I've added new info and sources (universities' studies) and removed that French source as it doesn't mention any. Goo3 (talk) 17:52, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@Goo3: Looks better, I removed the citation to the site that sells tutoring as it has no evidence of peer review. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 18:16, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Richard-of-Earth, I see, but why to remove the citation if the author cites trusted sources and the article is published on a well-known website? Goo3 (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@Goo3: Preply, the host site of the article, allows people to register on the website as tutors and allows those tutors to publish articles. This fits the definition of a self-published article. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources. However I wanted to be objective about this, so I searched the articles to see if others have used this site as a source. I discovered it has been used about ten times. Eight of them have been added by you and two by this IP editor. I also notice you have been very active editing the Preply article. So I get that you think it is an awesome site and perhaps it is, but it is not suitable as a source for citations and you should stop using it as such. But if you still think it is a citation we should use, we can take this to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and get the opinion of others if it should be used and I will yield to their consensus. If not, I do intend to remove those other citations you and the IP added. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 02:16, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Richard-of-Earth, thanks. Filtering sources from preply could make sense since I see that part of tutors there are really professionals and partly they're not. Probably I'll use only articles citing studies and other sources as well. Could you also name websites related to language studying that could be used this way? Goo3 (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

@Goo3: Whenever possible I use books from reliable publishers. I search Google Books and try to get citations from last century to ensure they are not just copying Wikipedia. The type of publisher to avoid are listed at Wikipedia:List of companies engaged in the self-publishing business. That said, Mignon Fogarty, a former professor of journalism at the University of Nevada, runs a pod cast Grammar Girl's Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing. That looks reliable to me. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2020 (UTC)