Re: Video Blog Wikipedia Entry
- --- In email@example.com, "Gena" <compumavengal@...> wrote:
>Yes, in my view, knowledge and standard information comes out of human
> Sorry I'm jumping into this a little late. I'd like to add my point of
> view from a library student standpoint, particularly for PatrickD
> Nobody owns information. If you chose to be a Shepard of the Video
> Blog section then there are responsibilities beyond your or my opinion
> on a topic.
> Citation from an authorized and verifiable source is important. That
> verification can come from a number of sources. This can include
> traditional media. However even librarians (and those that hope to
> work among them) understand the rapidly increasing flow of
> information. We absolutely evaluate but don't restrict where good
> information can come from.
> For an quick example: Twitter. M$M (outside of the computer
> publications) hasn't a clue about what Twitter is or its
> functionality. If I had to write up a citation for Twitter there would
> be no point in searching traditional media, although I would do that
> as a matter of course. On the date of this post I'm not going to find
> a Twitter book or manual.
> What are the words, terms and concepts I need to understand? What is
> the vocabulary? Can I find multiple source to verify that vocabulary?
> I would also go to the source, i.e. the Twitter web site. I would look
> for competitors or vendors with a similar service. I would seek out
> and observe those people who would have a relationship with the
> service or who would have experience. This could be professional or
> highly advanced nerd or geek.
> Next, I would look at affinity groups (there must be a Twitter group
> someplace) and observe the posts for those persons who seem to know
> what they are talking about. They could led me to a verifiable or
> trusted source.
> My point is that there is a process to verifying information. It is
> not an exclusive "it can only come from one direction" process.
> Information has a flow, a relationship to the people that use it. It
> is organic not static. Course if you do it right there can be a kind
> of rapture in crafting just the right citation.
interaction and incorporation into persistent human action. It
develops naturally and an authority only is valid in how well they
conceptualize the natural occurrence. Whether the authority be a
judge, newspaper editorial stance, encyclopedic reference, etc.
- On 5/3/07, Patrick Delongchamp <pdelongchamp@...> wrote:
>... does this mean "The Journal of Experimental Psychology" or "Science" or
> I know that sources that require subscriptions are heavily discouraged.
> I've never looked up student newspapers though. I'd say there's a good
> chance they're ok. You should check it out.
the "New England Journal of Medicine" are discouraged a reliable sources?
(Since they require a subscription?)
... just trying to understand
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]