Reliable publications include established newspapers, academic journals and books, textbooks, and other published sources with reputations for accuracy and fact-checking.
Unreliable sources include blog posts and other self-published works, press releases, and social media posts.
In order for a source to be considered verifiable, other editors should be able to consult the source.
Is the source independent of the subject?
Is the source connected in any way to the subject? This is especially important when writing biographies or about organizations.
For example, if you were writing a biography, sources like the person's webpage or personal blog would not be considered independent.
Is the source primary or secondary?
Primary sources include first-hand accounts, autobiographies, and other original content.
Wikipedia allows limited use of primary sources, but typically only for straightforward, descriptive statements of facts, and only if they are published and verifiable without requiring specialized knowledge.
Secondary sources should be the main basis for a biography on Wikipedia.
If you're working on a topic related to medicine or psychology, ensure that your sources follow these special guidelines.
If you're creating a new article, consider the following:
Ensure that your topic meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
In order for a topic to meet the notability requirement, you must be able to identify 2-3 sources that are reliable, verifiable, and independent of the subject you're writing about.
Finding sufficient sources to establish notability can be especially hard when writing about people or organizations.
Sources that are not independent of the subject might be useful additions, but don't count towards the notability requirement.
Wikipedia has developed special guidelines for writing about living persons. Please follow these carefully.
Wikipedia has a series of guidelines for writing about different categories of people, such as academics and artists. If you're trying to create a new entry about a living person, please look at these carefully.
If you're not sure whether a source is reliable, ask a librarian! If you have questions about Wikipedia's sourcing rules, you can use the Get Help button below to contact your Wikipedia Expert.
This is where you will compile the bibliography for your Wikipedia assignment. Add the name and/or notes about what each source covers.
Montoya, John Edward, and Richard Criley. “Expanding Tree Diversity in Hawai'i's Landscapes: Beach Heliotrope, Tournefortia Argentea.” University of Hawai'i, Mar. 2014.
This is an article from the University of Hawaii's college of tropical agriculture and it details the benefits that the tree has in coastal stabilization and gives a detailed description of the tree.
Wang, Xiangping, et al. “Gynodioecy or Leaky Dioecy? the Unusual Sexual System of a Coral Dune-Habitant Tournefortia Argentea (Boraginaceae).” Plant Systematics and Evolution, vol. 306, no. 4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01698-0.
This article is peer reviewed and gives insight into how the heliotrope breeds and grows. It is an interesting case
Chassagne, François, et al. “Polynesian Medicine Used to Treat Diarrhea and Ciguatera: An Ethnobotanical Survey in Six Islands from French Polynesia.” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 292, 2022, p. 115186., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2022.115186.
This article is peer reviewed and is lengthy, discussing in great detail the uses of the heliotrope in medicine
Manner, Harley I. “Tournefortia Argentea (Tree Heliotrope).” Species Profile for Pacific Island Agroforestry, Apr. 2006.
Peer reviewed, on google scholar, and is a very comprehensive paper about the tree heliotrope.
Ryan Hills (Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI)), and Madagascar) Velosoa Razafiniary (RBG Kew. “The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.” IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, 24 July 2020, https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/165436903/165436944.
Talks about how it is rated for survivability and its endangered level (it is okay)
