Powerbase:A Guide to Referencing

Spinprofiles is strictly referenced. This means that every piece of information in an article should be accompanied by a link to an authoritative source for that information. The link should be provided in two places: as a plain numbered reference link immediately after the sentence or paragraph containing the assertion, such as this link [1], and as a full citation in the External Links section of the article.

Some guidelines:

• Reference links should point directly to the relevant page on the referenced website. It is not sufficient to merely give a link to the homepage. The aim is to make it as easy as possible for readers to verify assertions in articles.
• You should consider the authoritativeness of the external website when giving a citation. For example, many Wikipedia articles are themselves extremely poorly referenced, and so Wikipedia is not considered an authoritative source for external references. (If you want to do something about this, please join the Wikipedia Fact and Reference Check project).
• If you fail to provide adequate and convenient references for your article or contribution, expect it to be heavily edited down by other users or SourceWatch editors, relocated to the 'talk' page pending verification or deleted altogether. Although SourceWatch employs a paid editor, it is not his job to bring contributions up to the required referencing standard. That is your job.

Referencing format

The original format used in SourceWatch was by adding references to the "External Links" section like this:

• Paul Hutcheon, "Sleaze probe into nuclear lobbying at Holyrood", Sunday Herald, January 22, 2006.

Since SourceWatch was first launched in early 2003, the Mediawiki software has been upgraded. One of the new features allows a slightly modified version of reference style above to be added at the relevant point in the text. In conjunction with the creation of a new section for references before the "External Links" section at the foot of the page, this automatically indexes all the references.

So the steps for the new system are:

1. Add < ref >Paul Hutcheon, "Sleaze probe into nuclear lobbying at Holyrood", Sunday Herald, January 22, 2006. < /ref > at the appropriate point in the text. (Though without the spaces inside the < and >).

2. On a new page or where there is only an "External Links" section, you will need to create a new section for the references to appear.

This is done by adding References (straddling two sets of == to make the sub-heading). Then add < references/ > (Though without the spaces inside the < and >).

What if I'm adding to a page that has references in the old format?

It is best if you add your new material using the new format. If the article is reasonbly short, you could convert some or all of the other references to the new format.

If you don't have the time to do that, that's OK. Overtime we aim to convert old article refrences over to the new system.

Are there any tips and tricks with the new system?

Yes. There are two things that may happen if you don't quite get the coding right.

• If you add the opening < ref > tag but don't include the / in the < /ref > second one, when you preview or save the rest of the text on the page after the ref tag will disappear. Don't panic. Just add the / in the second ref tag and all will be restored.

• If, when creating the new "References" section at the foot of the page, you omit the / from the < references/ > command you will get the following error message

"Cite error 5; Invalid < references > tag; no input is allowed, use < references />"

Again, you just need to go back and add the missing / and all will be fixed.

Referencing newspapers

Citations for newspaper articles should use the following format:

• Paul Hutcheon, "Sleaze probe into nuclear lobbying at Holyrood", Sunday Herald, January 22, 2006.

Some online resources require a subscription (especially trade journals). If so, make this clear in the citation:

• "Transcript to VNR Teleconference", O'Dwyers PR Daily, March 17, 2005. (Sub req'd).

Bear in mind that even the more reliable news outlets make mistakes. Sometimes they append corrections at the head or foot of online stories or link to them. Sometimes points in an article are contested in a letter to the editor. Take care to see if there was a response or correction to an article before relying on it.

However, some subscription-only articles can be found elsewhere on the web. A simple way to check for this is to search Google for the article's title, or a phrase from the article text. If so, provide a link:

• Jonathan Leake and Dan Box, "The nuclear charm offensive", New Statesman, May 23, 2005. Subscription req'd after first page view. Available without restrictions at the Australian Financial Review.

Where the name of the publication is not well known or where there are a number of publications in different countries with the same title, consider adding where the publication you are referring to is published. For example, Independent (UK) to distinguish it from other publications with the same title elsewhere.

Earlier newspaper articles that are not readily available online for general users can still be cited. However, it is best to state the publication title and date either in the text of the paragraph or in brackets at the end of the paragraph. In the External links section add the full citation details, including the page reference and, if appropriate, the edition it was from. (Edition details matter - often a story will be included in one edition of the same day's publication while clippings and microfiche might only have clips from an edition the story is not included in).

Tips for finding permanent links to news sources

• CongressDaily stories: CongressDaily is a valuable source of detailed information about the actions of the U.S. Congress. However, it is also very expensive and its articles are generally behind a paywall, preventing most citizen editors from being able to read the full article. Government Executive, however, often reprints articles on its website, which is not behind a paywall. Before linking to CongressDaily as a source, check the Government Executive site for a link to a copy of the story.

• Yahoo! News stories: Yahoo! news links expire quickly—months, weeks or even days after being posted—leaving articles to which they are attached orphaned, particularly if only the article's URL is posted as a source. When Yahoo! links are included in the External Links section accompanied by an article title, that also often ends in futility later to locate another active link for the reference. Yahoo!, as do others using wire service reports, frequently slightly or greatly alters the original article title, making it most often impossible to locate a replacement source for the article.

• Often, blogs follow the same practice of posting the Yahoo! news links within cited material. Linking to a blog which has as its sole source a Yahoo! news link will also result in an inactive link in the future, rendering the quoted material without a source and unreliable, as well.

• Although the WaybackMachine and other archive sources are valuable tools, they cannot locate expired Yahoo! links. Once the article disappears from Yahoo!'s cache, neither a Yahoo! or a Google search will be able to find the link.

• Google news stories: The most reliable way to ensure that news articles do not end up with inactive links (and sans a reliable source for the information to which the URL was attached) is to use a Google search to find a more reliable source for the article.

• Google provides links to wire service as well as self-generated news articles for all the major news and wire services, including ABC News, CBS News, NBC News/MSNBC, CNN, Bloomberg News, and Fox News; the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France Presse, Inter Press Service, McClatchy Newspapers, Cox Newspapers, UPI, and more; The Washington Post, The Washington Times, New York Daily News, The New York Sun, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, The Seattle Times, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago Tribune, Dallas Morning News, Houston Chronicle, BBC (UK),Guardian Unlimited (UK), The Independent (UK), Times of London, USA TODAY, Editor & Publisher, Christian Science Monitor, The Hill, Newsweek, TIME, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair (politics), The Village Voice, etc., which provide enduring article links.

• Note that The New York Times is not a reliable source, as, like Yahoo!, its local news feeds often expire (or are archived for $$$) within a very short time.

• However, you can use the New York Times link generator to find permanent, non-pay links for older New York Times stories.
• Many of the same articles posted in the New York Times are cross-posted at the more reliable International Herald Tribune.

• Note that The Washington Times daily news links have a short expiration date. An archived link can be accessed via WaybackMachine.org.

• Google also includes links to online news journals, blogs, forums, message boards, and just about any possible online link, including cross-posted articles at Free Republic (with comments), NewsMax, and WorldNetDaily, and archived articles at truthout and Common Dreams.

• Significant article links are often buried several pages deep, however, and searching beyond the first five, ten, twenty or more pages of search results may be necessary to arrive at a "gem".

• Breitbart: Breitbart provides links to breaking news

• BuzzFlash: BuzzFlash provides links to current headline news and blog articles, as well as its own articles and provides a news alert service.

• Ice Rocket: The Ice Rocket search engine accesses blogs, the web, MySpace, and news links. A word of caution is necessary, though, regarding blogs: unless you are familiar with a particular blog, tread carefully, as spyware, adware, malware and trojans may be lurking there. The same applies to MySpace pages.

Referencing news agencies / wire services

The Associated Press (AP), United Press International (UPI), Reuters, All Headline News, BusinessWire, ChristianNewsWire, Agence France Presse (AFP), PR Newswire, U.S. Newswire, Market Wire, etc., are wire services. They are not publications although each has its own news website. Articles may be written by a wire service reporter but when an article is used by a publication, that reporter's name may or may not remain attached. Additionally, often a wire service is not referenced at the top of an article but reference to it as the or one of the sources for an article is often located at the end of or below an article.

The original wire service author's name may not appear anywhere in the article itself or it may be mentioned in the credit line at the bottom or below the article. This is frequently the case for wire service articles cited by online news journals, international publications and blog and forum entries, especially where no other attribution has been noted.

Primary and secondary sources

It is worth remembering that a link to a primary source is usually more valuable than a seconday source.

For example, the statement by George W. Bush that America is "addicted to oil" can be found both in mainstream media outlets and in the official transcript of the 2006 State of the Union address. The advantage of a link to the primary source is that readers can read the full context of the original statement. Where possible, link to primary sources.

Often short mainstream news reports will omit important contextual information or miss important leads.

Referencing partisan or biased sources

Because Sourcewatch and its Congresspedia component are dedicated to documenting the activities of public officials, people and organizations who are not unimpeachable sources of information, it is sometime necessary to reference their websites or other sources to make that documentation. Additionally, sometimes third-party documents are housed on the websites of biased sources, making it necessary to use those websites as a source. In these cases the website and the content should be clearly identified rather than treating the source as objective.

For example, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) released a report on Republican congressional corruption. A proper way to cite the material would be to write, “Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) released a report in 2006 accusing Republican members of Congress of designing the nations energy policy to ‘enrich the oil and energy interests that have financed the Republican agenda’,” and link to the report on her website as the source. An improper way to cite the material would be to write, “Republican members of Congress designed America’s national energy policy to benefit the oil and energy industries that have financed the Republican agenda,” and link to the report on her website as a source.

If you would like to explore allegations like the one Rep. Slaughter made then an even more valuable way of contributing to SourceWatch and Congresspedia would be to locate the original sources in her report, verify the information and present it in a fact-based, objective manner. That way what is documented is not the fact that Rep. Slaughter made the allegations but that her allegations are (possibly) true.

Referencing books

When citing passages from a book, especially one not searchable online via Google books, reference it as for a newspaper article that is not available online.

It is worth stressing that when citing a page number check whether there was more than one edition of the book and, if so, state which edition you are citing. Page numbering differs between editions for a range of reasons including revisions in later editions, deletions for legal reasons in one country or printing on slightly different format paper in one country. If a book was published in both softback and hardback it is worth identifying which one you are citing.

Saving copies of the original article

Often link addresses will change. Sometimes media releases will be removed from a website because of content that was later considered embarrassing. Sometimes entire sites will be removed. If a reference is critical to an article and you think there is a chance it might be removed later, it is worth saving a copy of the original page to your hard drive. (For example, you could save it as an Acrobat pdf file complete with the original web address and the date that you saved it). While there are Internet archives, they don't catch everything.

Evaluating sources

• Institutional sources vs. blogs and other amateur sources:

• Not a problem: Rhetoric and opinion in a source: Reporting that uncovers new and valuable information is done on blogs and other sites that are written by people with a distinct point of view. These include pieces in magazines that have ideological points of view (including the Washington Monthly and the National Review as well as some blogs like Talking Points Memo. It is best to find a source that has an established, independent point of view in order to aid other editors in quickly evaluating the reliability of your additions. However, sometimes a "biased" source is simply the best one. While the opinions they express should not be treated as facts, there are two types of information you can glean from them:
  1. Definite, incontrovertible statements of fact like a quote or action. Not to be confused with a characterization of something, which is basically an opinion.
  2. Documentation that the writer of the piece said something. Sometimes when reporting on writings by pundits or reporters it is useful to document that they said something, in which case their "biased" piece is the primary source.

• Not a problem: Profanity in sources: In the blogosphere particularly, authors sometimes use profanity. While it is best to link to a source that does not contain profanity in order to protect other editors who are checking your work from having to be exposed to it unwillingly, sometimes a source that includes profanity is simply the best one.