Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are_weblogs reliable sources? Are weblogs reliable sources? In many cases, no. Most private weblogs ("blogs"), especially those hosted by blog-hosting services such as Blogger, are self-published sources; many of them published pseudonymously. There is no fact-checking process and no guarantee of quality of ...
A canonical example is J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of the television series Babylon 5, who discussed the show at length on Usenet. His postings are archived and authenticated on his website, and may be an acceptable source on the topic of Babylon 5 under the self-publication provision of verifiability policy .
Weblogs, Inc. was a blog network that published content on a variety of subjects, including tech news, video games, automobiles, and pop culture. At one point, the network had as many as 90 blogs, although the vast majority of its traffic could be attributed to a smaller number of breakout titles, as was typical of most large-scale successful blog networks of the mid-2000s.
Dictionaries and encyclopedias: reference works containing multiple entries for different words or topics. Wikipedia is an example of an encyclopedia. Archival and other primary sources: historic documents. This page outlines appropriate use of primary sources.
Weblogs.com is a website created by UserLand Software and later maintained by Dave Winer. It launched in late 1999 as a free, registration-based web crawler monitoring weblogs, was converted into a ping-server in October 2001, [ 1 ] and came to be used by most blog applications.
This is a list of notable blogs.A blog (contraction of weblog) is a web site with frequent, periodic posts creating an ongoing narrative. They are maintained by both groups and individuals, the latter being the most common.
The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.
WP:RSN discussion has described it as a "content farm" that pays its writers to produce "breezy, popular interest pieces with no footnotes" based on popular search terms, and concern was expressed that it may be drawing uncredited information from Wikipedia and creating an information loop. groups.google.com (and other Usenet portals). The ...