Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2024 February 27

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 27

Reliable sources on Wikipedia: Writings by professional geographers?

Would writings by professional geographers, including from the early 20th century, be considered reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes? 172.56.187.204 (talk) 03:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It's not so much about the credentials of the writers themselves, it's about where their writings are published. An article by a professional geographer on a self-published blog would not be a reliable source. The same article by the same writer published in a journal or book would be a reliable source. --Viennese Waltz 06:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

What about if one of their books is cited, with this book itself having an extensive bibliography at the end of it? 172.56.187.204 (talk) 07:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

A self-published article by a subject matter expert can be used as a source, with caution. Graham87 (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Something like that would be fine, if an independent second source could be found that says exactly the same thing. This is called backing up the first source. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Geography is a huge topic, covering many subfields, some of which have advanced tremendously since the early 20th century. Without stating what the geographer is being cited for, it isn't possible to make any sensible comment on reliability. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

We have a page dedicated to such questions: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. As is stated there:

Context is important: supply the source, the article it is used in, and the claim it supports.

If the expert is notable, you can turn the point into an unassailable factual statement by presenting it not as a fact but as an opinion, using a formulation such as,

However, Cathy Whitlock has argued that the reported radiocarbon ages from terrestrial pollen concentrates in Yellowstone Lake are much too old.^[123]

 --Lambiam 08:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)