[WikiEN-l] Are phone books reliable sources?

Mon Jun 5 04:25:23 UTC 2006

On 6/4/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> This all depends on how rigidly you look at the term "source".
> Scientific American does not typically have a lot of footnotes, but it
> does give opportunities such as this for further exploration. Are you
> saying that this makes the magazine less credible?
>
> Ec

Scientific American generally gives far more references than most
other science magazines I can think of (Discover is generally on or
below SA's par, and Science News is definitely way below)

~maru