Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Offline sources

Project page Talk
This page is about using offline sources. For using Wikipedia offline, see Wikipedia:Database download.
This is an explanatory essay about the Wikipedia:Verification policy.
This page is intended to provide additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.
Shortcut
  • WP:OFFLINE
This page in a nutshell: Offline sources are just as valid as online sources.
Even though Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, and even though editors are increasingly using online sources and e-journals, printed books and paper journals that are not available online are still a reliable source.

Wikipedia's reliable sources guideline states that articles should be sourced with reliable, third-party, published sources. Even though Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, there is no distinction between using online versus offline sources. While many editors use online sources, such as websites and online journals, many great sources are only available offline in printed books and paper journals. Don't let the fact that a printed book or journal is not available online scare you away from using them as a source in Wikipedia. Likewise, do not remove cited material merely because it is from an offline source.

That Wikipedia relies extensively on online sources is not surprising, considering the relative ease of accessing such materials. There is also an additional advantage of using online sources, because it allows all users to evaluate the source and its value to the article. However, this reliance on online sources can lead to recentism, where most articles and content are from the Internet era. It can also lead to an unfair bias against print books and print journals, where an editor's addition of material sourced from a book or print journal is reverted with the comment "Revert - I couldn't access and confirm this source online."

UsageEdit

Books are a typical example of an offline source. These are often great resources for history, philosophy and literature, and they often contain information that can't be found online. Several ongoing projects, such as Project Gutenberg, Internet Archive, NLA Trove and Google Book Search, aim at digitizing certain books or newspaper articles and presenting them online. Even if the books are online, it might be necessary to consult a print edition to double-check any errors from the OCR scanning.

Many academic journals only make short abstracts available online. Other content providers, like the Wall Street Journal, publish their content behind a paywall that prevents non-subscribers from accessing the content. Other websites, like the Philadelphia Inquirer, only publish their content online for a few weeks. Sometimes a source was once online, but now is offline (link rot).

Special care should be taken when using offline sources. Provision of full bibliographic information helps Wikipedia's readers and editors find the source when they need it, and also increases the source's credibility as a reliable source. This is often done by using a fully-filled out citation template such as {{cite book}} or {{cite news}}. Use of the quote= parameter within those citation templates provides some context for the reference. This is especially important when using the off-line source to support a fact that might be controversial or is likely to be challenged. Providing identifiers such as an ISBN, OCLC number, Open Library number or similar can help others locate physical copies, as cataloguing data can often vary from one library to another.

Many offline sources are easier than you might think to find online. The Internet Archive full text search, as well as Internet Archive Scholar, are often able to provide a copy or snippet from millions of academic papers, books and even TV programs.

Challenging offline sourcesEdit

Sometimes, the use of an offline source will be challenged. Be sure to assume good faith for the user who cited the offline source. They might even be able to provide you a scan or an excerpt from that source. Consider visiting your local library to obtain a copy. Even if the library doesn't have that particular book or journal article, it might be available through interlibrary loan. Also consider posting an inquiry on the relevant WikiProject, because some interested editors might have a copy of that source. The volunteers at WikiProject Resource Exchange might be able to help you coordinate your search.

See alsoEdit

  • FUTON bias
  • Wikipedia:Resource requests
  • Wikipedia:Link rot
  • Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost
  • Wikipedia:Offline sources only, arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
  • v
  • t
  • e
Wikipedia essays
Essays on building, editing, and deleting content
Philosophy
  • Articles must be written
  • All Five Pillars are the same height
  • Avoid vague introductions
  • Be a reliable source
  • Civil POV pushing
  • Cohesion
  • Competence is required
  • Concede lost arguments
  • Dissent is not disloyalty
  • Don't lie
  • Don't search for objections
  • Editing Wikipedia is like visiting a foreign country
  • Editors will sometimes be wrong
  • Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia
  • Explanationism
  • External criticism of Wikipedia
  • Here to build an encyclopedia
  • Levels of competence
  • Most ideas are bad
  • Need
  • Neutrality of sources
  • Not editing because of Wikipedia restriction
  • The one question
  • Oversimplification
  • Paradoxes
  • Paraphrasing
  • POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields
  • Process is important
  • Product, process, policy
  • Purpose
  • Reasonability rule
  • Systemic bias
  • There is no seniority
  • Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia
  • Tendentious editing
  • The role of policies in collaborative anarchy
  • The rules are principles
  • Trifecta
  • Wikipedia in brief
  • Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
  • Wikipedia is a community
Article construction
  • 100K featured articles
  • Acronym overkill
  • Advanced source searching
  • Adding images improves the encyclopedia
  • Advanced article editing
  • Advanced table formatting
  • Advanced template coding
  • Advanced text formatting
  • Akin's Laws of Article Writing
  • Alternatives to the "Expand" template
  • Amnesia test
  • A navbox on every page
  • An unfinished house is a real problem
  • Articles have a half-life
  • Autosizing images
  • Avoid mission statements
  • Bare URLs
  • Be neutral in form
  • Beef up that first revision
  • Blind men and an elephant
  • BOLD, revert, discuss cycle
  • Build content to endure
  • Cherrypicking
  • Chesterton's fence
  • Children's lit, adult new readers, & large-print books
  • Citation overkill
  • Citation underkill
  • Common-style fallacy
  • Concept cloud
  • Creating controversial content
  • Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability
  • Deprecated sources
  • Dictionaries as sources
  • Don't demolish the house while it's still being built
  • Don't get hung up on minor details
  • Don't hope the house will build itself
  • Don't panic
  • Don't revert due solely to "no consensus"
  • Don't teach the controversy
  • Editing on mobile devices
  • Editors are not mindreaders
  • Encourage the newcomers
  • Endorsements (commercial)
  • Featured articles may have problems
  • Formatting bilateral relations articles
  • Formatting bilateral relations templates
  • Fruit of the poisonous tree
  • Give an article a chance
  • How to write a featured article
  • Identifying and using independent sources
    • History sources
    • Law sources
    • Primary sources
    • Science sources
    • Style guides
    • Tertiary sources
  • Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats
  • Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace
  • Inaccuracy
  • Introduction to structurism
  • Link rot
  • Mine a source
  • Merge Test
  • Minors and persons judged incompetent
  • "Murder of" articles
  • Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography
  • Not everything needs a navbox
  • Not everything needs a template
  • Not everything needs a WikiProject
  • Nothing is in stone
  • Obtain peer review comments
  • Organizing disambiguation pages by subject area
  • Permastub
  • Potential, not just current state
  • Presentism
  • Principle of Some Astonishment
  • Printability
  • Pruning article revisions
  • Publicists
  • Put a little effort into it
  • Restoring part of a reverted edit
  • Robotic editing
  • Sham consensus
  • Source your plot summaries
  • Specialized-style fallacy
  • Stub Makers
  • Run an edit-a-thon
  • Temporary versions of articles
  • Tertiary-source fallacy
  • There are no shortcuts to neutrality
  • There is no deadline
  • There is a deadline
  • The deadline is now
  • Understanding Wikipedia's content standards
  • Walled garden
  • What an article should not include
  • Wikipedia is a work in progress
  • Wikipedia is not a reliable source
  • Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion
  • The world will not end tomorrow
  • Write the article first
  • Writing better articles
Writing article content
  • Avoid thread mode
  • Copyediting reception sections
  • Gender-neutral language
  • Proseline
  • Write the article first
  • Writing about women
  • Writing better articles
Removing or
deleting content
  • Adjectives in your recommendations
  • AfD is not a war zone
  • Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
  • Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews
  • Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions
  • Arguments to make in deletion discussions
  • Avoid repeated arguments
  • Before commenting in a deletion discussion
  • But there must be sources!
  • Confusing arguments mean nothing
  • Content removal
  • Counting and sorting are not original research
  • Delete the junk
  • Does deletion help?
  • Don't attack the nominator
  • Don't confuse stub status with non-notability
  • Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument
  • Follow the leader
  • How to save an article proposed for deletion
  • I just don't like it
  • Identifying blatant advertising
  • Identifying test edits
  • Immunity
  • Keep it concise
  • Liar liar pants on fire
  • Nothing
  • Nothing is clear
  • Overzealous deletion
  • Relisting can be abusive
  • Relist bias
  • The Heymann Standard
  • Unopposed AFD discussion
  • Wikipedia is not Whack-A-Mole
  • Why was the page I created deleted?
  • What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion
  • When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork
  • No Encyclopedic Use
Essays on civility
The basics
  • Accepting other users
  • Apology
  • Contributing to complicated discussions
  • Divisiveness
  • Edit at your own pace
  • Encouraging the newcomers
  • Enjoy yourself
  • Expect no thanks
  • High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors
  • How to be civil
  • Maintaining a friendly space
  • Negotiation
  • Obsessive–compulsive disorder editors
  • Relationships with academic editors
  • Thank you
  • Too long; didn't read
  • Truce
  • Unblock perspectives
  • We are all Wikipedians here
Philosophy
  • A weak personal attack is still wrong
  • Advice for hotheads
  • An uncivil environment is a poor environment
  • Be the glue
  • Beware of the tigers!
  • Civility warnings
  • Deletion as revenge
  • Failure
  • Forgive and forget
  • It's not the end of the world
  • Nobody cares
  • Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals
  • Old-fashioned Wikipedian values
  • Profanity, civility, and discussions
  • Revert notification opt-out
  • Shadowless Fists of Death!
  • Staying cool when the editing gets hot
  • The grey zone
  • The last word
  • There is no Divine Right Of Editors
  • Most ideas are bad
  • Nothing is clear
  • The rules of polite discourse
  • There is no common sense
  • Two wrongs don't make a right
  • Wikipedia is not about winning
  • Wikipedia should not be a monopoly
  • Writing for the opponent
  • Reader
Dos
  • Argue better
  • Assume good faith
  • Assume the assumption of good faith
  • Assume no clue
  • Avoid personal remarks
  • Avoid the word "vandal"
  • Be excellent to one another
  • Beyond civility
  • Call a spade a spade
  • Candor
  • Deny recognition
  • Desist
  • Discussing cruft
  • Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass
  • Encourage full discussions
  • Get over it
  • How to lose
  • Imagine others complexly
  • Just drop it
  • Keep it down to earth
  • Mind your own business
  • Say "MOBY"
  • Mutual withdrawal
  • Read before commenting
  • Settle the process first
Don'ts
  • ALPHABETTISPAGHETTI
  • Civil POV pushing
  • Cyberbullying
  • Don't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack
  • Don't be a fanatic
  • Don't be a jerk
  • Don't be an ostrich
  • Don't be ashamed
  • Don't be a WikiBigot
  • Don't be high-maintenance
  • Don't be inconsiderate
  • Don't be obnoxious
  • Don't be prejudiced
  • Don't be rude
  • Don't be the Fun Police
  • Don't bludgeon the process
  • Don't call a spade a spade
  • Don't call the kettle black
  • Don't call things cruft
  • Don't come down like a ton of bricks
  • Don't cry COI
  • Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify
  • Don't drink the consensus Kool-Aid
  • Don't eat the troll's food
  • Don't fight fire with fire
  • Don't give a fuck
  • Don't help too much
  • Don't make a smarmy valediction part of your signature
  • Don't remind others of past misdeeds
  • Don't shout
  • Don't spite your face
  • Don't take the bait
  • Don't template the regulars
  • Don't throw your toys out of the pram
  • Do not insult the vandals
  • Griefing
  • Nationalist editing
  • No angry mastodons
    • just madmen
  • No Nazis
  • No, you can't have a pony
  • Passive aggression
  • Please don't bite the newcomers
  • POV railroad
  • There are no oracles
  • You can't squeeze blood from a turnip
WikiRelations
  • WikiBullying
  • WikiCrime
  • WikiHarassment
  • WikiHate
  • WikiLawyering
  • WikiLove
  • WikiPeace
Essays on notability
  • Advanced source searching
  • All high schools can be notable
  • Alternative outlets
  • Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
  • Articles with a single source
  • Avoid template creep
  • Bare notability
  • Big events make key participants notable
  • Bombardment
  • Businesses with a single location
  • But it's true!
  • Citation overkill
  • Common sourcing mistakes
  • Clones
  • Coatrack
  • Discriminate vs indiscriminate information
  • Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity
  • Every snowflake is unique
  • Existence ≠ Notability
  • Existence does not prove notability
  • Extracting the meaning of significant coverage
  • Fart
  • Google searches and numbers
  • High Schools
  • Inclusion is not an indicator of notability
  • Independent sources
  • Inherent notability
  • Insignificant
  • Masking the lack of notability
  • Make stubs
  • News coverage does not decrease notability
  • No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability
  • No big loss
  • No one cares about your garage band
  • No one really cares
  • Notability/Historical/Arguments
  • Notability cannot be purchased
  • Notability comparison test
  • Notability is not a level playing field
  • Notability is not a matter of opinion
  • Notability is not relevance or reliability
  • Notability means impact
  • Notability points
  • Notability sub-pages
  • Notabilitymandering
  • Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article
  • Obscurity ≠ Lack of notability
  • Offline sources
  • One hundred words
  • One sentence does not an article make
  • Other stuff exists
  • Overreliance upon Google
  • Perennial websites
  • Pokémon test
  • Read the source
  • Reducing consensus to an algorithm
  • Run-of-the-mill
  • Significant coverage not required
  • Solutions are mixtures and nothing else
  • Subjective importance
  • Third-party sources
  • Trivial mentions
  • Video links
  • Vanispamcruftisement
  • What BLP1E is not
  • What is and is not routine coverage
  • What notability is not
  • What to include
  • Wikipedia is not Crunchbase
  • Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause
  • Wikipedia is not the place to post your résumé
Humorous essays
  • Anti-Wikipedian
  • Asshole John rule
  • Assume bad faith
  • Assume faith
  • Assume good wraith
  • Assume stupidity
  • Assume that everyone's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faith
  • Avoid using preview button
  • Avoid using wikilinks
  • Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense
  • BOLD, revert, revert, revert
  • Boston Tea Party
  • Barnstaritis
  • CaPiTaLiZaTiOn MuCh?
  • Don't stuff beans up your nose
  • Don't tempt the wrath of the Whatever, from high atop the Thing
  • Don't-give-a-fuckism
  • Editcountitis
  • Edits Per Day
  • Editsummarisis
  • Editing Under the Influence
  • Embrace Stop Signs
  • Emerson
  • Seven Ages of Editor, by Will E. Spear-Shake
  • Go ahead, vandalize
  • How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
  • How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle
  • How to vandalize correctly
  • Is that even an essay?
  • Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them
  • Legal vandalism
  • LTTAUTMAOK
  • No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man
  • Oops Defense
  • Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you
  • Please bite the newbies
  • R-e-s-p-e-c-t
  • Requests for medication
  • Requirements for adminship
  • Rouge admin
  • Rouge editor
  • Sarcasm is really helpful
  • Sausages for tasting
  • The Night Before Wikimas
  • The first rule of Wikipedia
  • The Five Pillars of Untruth
  • Things that should not be surprising
  • The WikiBible
  • Watchlistitis
  • Why not create an account?
  • You don't have to be mad to work here, but
About essays
About essays
  • Essay guide
  • Value of essays
  • Difference between policies, guidelines and essays
  • Don't cite essays as if they were policy
  • Avoid writing redundant essays
  • Finding an essay
  • Quote your own essay
Policies and guidelines
  • About policies and guidelines
    • Policies
    • Guidelines
  • How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance
  • Policy writing is hard
Retrieved from "https://en.wikidark.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Offline_sources&oldid=1078462200"
Wikipedia dark mode