Are you supposed to reference your source? December 10, 2001 8:57 PM   Subscribe

Are you supposed to reference your source? Sometimes I feel like I should let others know where I found the info and other times I don't feel it adds anything to the post. I've often seen people add a [link via X site] to their posts. In my post here I didn't think it was necessary to include that I saw the article in the latest WIRED magazine b/c if you subscribe to or read WIRED you saw it and if you don't then it's new to you. Not suprisingly, the obligatory backhanded comment was made.
posted by suprfli to Etiquette/Policy at 8:57 PM (6 comments total)

(the offending comment.)

i don't think it's bad, supr; i gave the nod to urb on a bit of news i'd read in their mag once (regarding the film release of Ghost World). just cut it up to being snarky, i think -- we all do it some time.
posted by moz at 9:11 PM on December 10, 2001

i have a feeling that we've covered this before (indeed we have, and i think that thread covers it nicely)

my personal opinion is that if its a 'news' type story or medium-largish meme (eg ayb) that could of easily come from a major new sites or 'uber-blogs' (fark, romensko, memepool, etc) then theres really no need for a source credit, espcially since the url is probably already doing the rounds in the usual fashion

on the other hand, if you come across the net equivalent of 'buried treasure' via someones personal site, by all means give them a link back, especially if they have a site full of contenty goodness - often the source will be more rewarding longterm than the link itself :)

posted by sawks at 9:12 PM on December 10, 2001

thanx for the links to the previous discussion. i feel the same way as you sawks. if i got the info from a little gem of a website then i want to pass along the link so others can enjoy it rather than keeping all of the goodness to myself.
posted by suprfli at 10:42 PM on December 10, 2001

Pass it along if you want to. I personally feel that any credit is mainly due to the creator of the content, and don't tend to post and am not really interested in attributions concerning sources. It makes me feel all dirty.

If the source adds considerably to the discussion and offers a permalink, I'd probably consider giving that instead of the link straight to the content. However, it doesn't take long for my eyes to slide off attributions when they are marked as such, and I'm certainly not into chiding anyone for giving them.

I think it's the decision of the person posting the link or comment: there's no hard and fast law.
posted by walrus at 6:38 AM on December 11, 2001

I don't get Wired anymore, and care even less that you got the link there. That being said, I think it is good manners to phrase it something like this; "Whilst flipping through the latest issue of Wired, I found [x]..."

By the way, I am now jonesing for a smooh cruiser... like sawks Dyno. - Thanks a lot.
posted by hotdoughnutsnow at 3:55 PM on December 11, 2001

yes, I meant smooth... or schmoo.
posted by hotdoughnutsnow at 4:00 PM on December 11, 2001

« Older Can we raise the level?   |   Some people don't like Kottke Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments