Online Resources VS Physical Published Resources

Okay, this has become a bit of a pet peeve of mine. I'm currently at college and this college has a vast collection of resource materials in the form of our library. I kid you not when I say you can get a book covering just about any topic in science, social studies, literature, etc. Least to say, I've gotten a lot of information from it. However, the problem comes in when I get on certain online debates, it turns out to be rather difficult to cite books as resources without it holding no weight due to the inaccessibility of those type of books to other people. More so, many of these books get really deep into the matters and citing them may often times cause more confusion than actual reinforcement since let's face it, not everyone has read into this stuff as obsessively as I have.

On the other hand, I have my trusty Google search bar at the top right of my screen that I can use to bring up data and information that I can cite right off the bat... unless nothing but several thousand results of uneducated people arguing and flanderizing the topic come up. This makes it rather hard to get anything considerable on things like abortion, anything remotely related to Hitler, history the evolutionary theory and the Catholic Church, history of intelligent design, anything that can be considered remotely touchy. And even then, the data and information is usually abridged and more likely to be false than published work because there's been no editor to read through it.

Um, question, right. So do you people ever use any resources for papers you have to write that aren't from online? Just how much digging do you do in your local library? Is it even worthwhile to cite some of these sources if they're that out of reach?

EDIT: For the record, TV Tropes On Topic Conversations isn't really where most of my online debating occurs. I'm usually busy debating at a different site that's about as anal as I am.

edited 12th Apr '11 2:16:06 PM by Usht

You can use the general information you glean from such texts. Certainly anybody on this board that is studying or has completed a university degree is drawing from a vast number of written texts which are not easily accessed online. It does make it somewhat difficult when you cannot reference specific texts but you never do that outside of writing a thesis or full fledged essay anyway, which would be overkill for any online forum.

edited 12th Apr '11 2:52:12 PM by breadloaf

Therein lies the problem. Even I do use general information, it's likely to lead to me often having to thoroughly explain what exactly it is that I'm referencing. Then people inevitably ask/attack the basic points of what I'm saying, leading me to have to give a bit of mini-lecture on the entire topic and then still getting refuted for various reasons, up to and including simple disbelief. Sometimes it's just easier not to bother at all or say "Here's source A, I also have source B available, and both show that my base of my argument is true". I'm not claiming to be right all of the time, but it gets a little old having to constantly validate any base claims I make.

I'm probably ranting right now, aren't I? Oh well.

I love textbooks. Somebody else waded through the literature and found the information I needed for me.

The trouble with the sciences is that there's so much out there. Too much information, often far too complicated for your needs, and you end up having to sift through it to find the few basic facts that you actually want.

Not to mention the fact that most uni teachers loathe Wikipedia (probably for good reason), and it's difficult to know what they'll accept in an online source. Obviously online journals are fine, and research organisation websites are good, while Answers.com and somebody's blog are right out. But the inbetween stuff? It's difficult to know.

edited 12th Apr '11 7:14:46 PM by LoniJay

Ugh, at least this isn't as bad as knowing there's a website you've read before that does have just the information you need, but not remembering what site. One of these days I'll find it again...

Google books often has large portions of texts, maybe the one you need will be available?

Wait this made me remember something.

Why am I allowed to check out any book from a public library for free, but not read the text of the book online at the library website?

What is the difference, exactly, aside from inconveniencing me?

Well you have to remember that this is an online debate, which is both better and worse than in person debates. You can cite sources but the majority of what happens here is impromptu. The bad side of online debates is that everybody is an "expert". It won't matter if all they ever did was read a wiki article on quantum physics, they'll start arguing against professors over the material.

There are an increasing number of people who believe that if you can't Google it it's not true.

Problem with my school's library is that a lot of their stuff is dated. Not a problem if you're writing a paper on, say, X book by X author, but when it comes to writing papers for something like my biology classes, internet searches become a lot more useful. Their printed material often simply can't keep up with new things being published every day.

It's doubtful that they'd be very good at gleaning and understanding information in general if they believed that anyway.

Depending on the subject, .gov sources can be highly useful. Also, go to a Wikipedia article and check the "references" section.

The vast majority of my sources have been physical, or locked away behind digital sites that require a subscription.

This is one of the main reasons why I hate people who demand I cite my sources.

Fortunately most of the stuff in my area of expertise is usually either "totally secret for marketing purposes" or "available in all imaginable forms because we like to geek out over it."

If the sources you're citing are available for sale online, you can always link to their page on Amazon or whatever.

Otherwise, I would think it's okay to link to journal sites or similar that are behind subscription walls so long as you let people know exactly what you are linking to. The more details, the better (like, Bibliography of a University paper levels of detail in your source).

I personally disregard any reference mention that is behind a "for sale" curtain online, for the same reason I disregard any source whose validity I can't check personally (that is, because I can't check its validity personally). The entire point of giving a reference is that people can compare and contrast for reference, and find more information. In most cases, such search is going to be the one use you are going to give to that material, so a purchase is not justifiable.

That's the same reason why I remove references to purchase sites in Wikipedia when I'm allowed to. The point of an online resource is, ideally, to check it online. Even with a web of trust, sidestepping the curtain requires finding someone who has, verifiably, accessed the content, no matter you can always ask a good soul of the internets to procure a freely accessible link to a curtained material.

I follow the same procedure for physical references: if it is a work expected to be found ina freely accessible public library, it can go; if it is a private college/university work in a setting that requires studentship to access, no.