reference

[Bert&Ernie]

Hope this is the right section!

I was wondering if I am able to use this forum at a reference for some TAFE work I am doing?

Thanks

[obtuse]

Really references should come from either peer reviewed journals, or the publishers of data (i.e. bureau of stats, or meteorlogy).

I would suspect that many methods published here are reworkings / modifications from techniques published elsewhere.

same with some of the facts, they need to be backed up.

In some cases you can use "pers. communications", or "unpublished data", and you do see this in academic papers. One of the best examples of this i have ever seen is in Snu's Garden of Eden where he referneces info sourced from individuals from here and other sites.

If you can find a paper, book, that back you up, its better. Even using sites like Wikipedia in some academic institutions is bad form and looked down upon, even though they now have a form of peer review to ensure facts. The web is seen as just so much blah and not credible.

I have thought a lot about this same thing, as there is some amazing facts found in forums that come from peoples own private reasearch and not published in any academic sense, so i guess caution should be observed.

Cheers, Ob.

[Bert&Ernie]

It is for some plant identifications

[ballzac]

The short answer would be "no". You would be better off finding detailed descriptions in peer-reviewed literature, or at the very least a respected book, and comparing it with your own observations. Not only is there no peer-review here, but not many people actually have the credentials to be formally identifying plants. A lot of people here are very knowledgeable, but a lot of the common IDs may be perpetuated myths. This doesn't matter for the purpose of knowing if member A has the same plant as member B, and for member A to know what the effects of plant X are going to be if he makes a tea out of it or smokes it, when he asks member B what the effects were when they did the same. But message boards cannot be relied upon for information that fits with the nomenclature in the literature. I think these things are getting better over time, but basically it looks really bad to submit any work that references a discussion forum as evidence for something, unless it was a thesis actually on the dynamics of online discussions or something.

[Bert&Ernie]

All right thanks guys

[kindness]

Its tafe not uni guys... I would say yep but also include other references. Do u have a set style of referencing for the course? If so what is it? There are ways to reference websites.

Hope this helps

[endorfinder]

You can reference a page here just like any other web site, just list the full URL and date accessed. However anything on a message board is a secondary source at best, you can probably do better...

[Halcyon Daze]

You can use it but you may lose marks for having poor reference choices. Look at your criteria sheet. How important is it to have good solid references for this particular assignment?

Sourcing reliable/ credible information is a good discipline to get into right from the start, and TAFE usually tries to push this point a bit. So go with the solid references, you'll know all about it once you hit Uni!

I'd also like to add that you should avoid referencing Wikipedia BUT, look at all the references at the bottom of the wikipedia page, They are the ones you really want to read. ( -My secret's out now)

Edited February 28, 2013 by Halcyon Daze