Talk:Internet research

message: Ok, ive added a paragraph mentioning search tool bias so kindly don't delete it without responding here. If we are going to mention the strengths of internet research, lets mention its weaknesses too. I'll get around to adding something about context and endorsements in time, since that is another significant feature of internet research.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contextcounts (talk • contribs) 22:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph added on search tool bias

message: I removed the parenthetical (no matter how trivial-seeming the subject) because it would appear irrelevent to defining what research is. Additionally, I removed this vague paragraph opener:
:The Internet also presents an alternate body of knowledge to the traditional print library resources, because much of the content is different. Internet resources have similar (or "the same") information as print sources, but they generally do not simply reproduce print content. Although books are nowadays produced using a digital version of the content, for most books such a version is not available on the Internet. On the other hand,
replacing it with simply It should be noted that. Finally, this "questions" section, while well thought-out, unfortunately has no place on Wikipedia:
*What is the scope and quality of online information? (e.g. On a practical level, given a range of everyday subjects, what is the difference between the available info found by visiting a fair-sized library, and on the Web?)
*Trusted sources: how can sources, like individual Web sites, and specific info be vetted? (eg. Wikipedia)
*What effect does keyword searching (combined with instant access) have on the way topics are defined and information located?
**What is the impact of search engine algorithms for determining relevance (which pages are returned in what order)? What about the presence of sponsored (for a fee) results that are prioritized? What about unannounced manipulation of search results to put certain results forward (e.g. optimizing Web pages to produce better search result rankings)?
*Facts and figures: What percentage of "essential" texts are available online? What materials are available only online (eg: full text of out-of-print books)? How has the (non-fiction) print publishing business been affected by the Net?
*How have people's active research habits been changed (seeking specific info, vs passive "research" from, for example, current media and casual conversation)?
*What effect is the availability of Internet research having on regular people (not students, professional researchers, etc) - are people feeling more empowered? Putting more thought into things? Is the level of expectation for factual presentations (eg: the nightly news) affected?
*Is the relative impermanence of a "link" as a source particularly relevant on any level (for example, a referenced book may be made unavailable, but presumably a copy exists somewhere, and can be located, whereas if a web site vanishes, it may be next to impossible to locate it again; in some cases, the link/site may be like the only existing copy of a book...)?
If you feel any of these should be re-inserted, please argue for doing so here first. \sim Lenoxus " * " 14:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed sections and phrases 

message: I removed this "methadology" section due to its vagueness:
There are a number of research methodologies and theoretical approaches that are recommended for Internet Research including:
* Visual ethnography.
* Content analysis.
* Discourse analysis.
* Statistical sampling.
* Survey research.
* Action research.
* Marxist approaches.
* Habermasian (public sphere approaches).
* Feminist research.
... particularly in the blurring of political and scientific themes. It's not really clear who's doing the "reccomending" here, either. \sim Lenoxus " * " 14:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Methadology" 

message: I have added a section on the most popular search tools used for Internet research. It is an important part of the topic, so please don't remove it without responding here. I also plan to eventually add a section on Internet research strategies, another critical area that should be covered. --Mkt gal (talk) 18:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on search tools 

message: Monash restructured their library, so the link at the bottom of the page has gone missing from their links on their website as well. Archives.org can't help. I've left a note on their website error form, but if nothing returns, I'll drop the link. 
Contextcounts (talk) 02:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tracing Monash Library link... 

message: Yes, its my book. Yes, i'm the author. Yes, i suppose there is some promotional intent. Having said that, the book is in the creative commons. It is detailed. It is 5 years old. My links have been here before (FAQ, SpireProject). And we did lose the reference from Monash. 
Before you revert the link, consider the link on its own merits. All i ask. David Contextcounts (talk) 02:31, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trepidation but i'll try. 

message: January 2013:
This is a C-class article and it has not changed much in the last five to ten years. I'm going to try to improve this with balance and depth - particularly in discussing the strengths and weaknesses and unique features of internet research.
First point - first line: This is also Google's defacto definition for internet research by the way. 
"Internet research is the practice of using the Internet, especially the World Wide Web, for research."
I see this as either a tautology, or just a little wrong. We can retrieve almost any research through the internet. That does not make it internet research. We can search Dialog databases through the internet. All we need is an account and a credit-card. No-one suggests searching such commercial databases is internet research, yet searching Medline or LOCOC most certainly is.
I've replace this with:
"Internet research is the practice of using internet information, especially free information on the World Wide Web, in research. It is:
focused and purposeful (so not recreational browsing), uses internet information or internet-based resources (like internet discussion lists),
immediate (drawing answers from information you can access without delay) and tends to access information without a purchase price."
Remember this line will become a defacto definition - I'm breaking it away from a catch-all phrase without meaning to something distinct from commercial or library or scientific research. It has strengths, habits and weaknesses, fleshed out in the next few paragraphs.
This is a C-class article and it has not kept pace with a maturing understanding of what is right and wrong with internet searching/researching. Five years ago we may have had an overly glowing sense of the wonders of internet research but if we can nail this article firmly, we can help readers understand this task in a much more wholesome way. I may come back later and remove some of the wishy-washyness (tends to/can be/usually) but i'd like your comments before i do that. Not certain how violent the response to this change will be.
Contextcounts (talk) 02:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And from what reliable source(s) are you drawing this definition? ElKevbo (talk) 02:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

text: ElKevbo, are you referring to the definition of internet research as distinct from library research and commercial research? There is a simple concise reference we could use at http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=24  Not certain what point of definition is in question here. Contextcounts (talk) 03:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I am referring to the definition both in its entirety and in its specifics. (That particular part, however, I don't have any questions about; it's more of a matter of placing scope on this article to keep it focused than anything else.  Unless, of course, there are reliable sources that explicitly use this phrase in a different manner which would require us to at least acknowledge that fact.) ElKevbo (talk) 09:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

text: Sent a note to buslib-l seeking a definition for Internet Research. Maybe that will lead to a usable weighty reference.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contextcounts (talk • contribs) 04:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 09:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  First change: complete rewrite of first section. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Internet research. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402131622/http://library.concordia.ca/help/howto/internethandout.html to http://library.concordia.ca/help/howto/internethandout.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402115040/https://www.library.uni.edu/research-help/undergrad-guide/doing-research/using-internet-research to https://www.library.uni.edu/research-help/undergrad-guide/doing-research/using-internet-research
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ??????
 Rivalx (talk) 11:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  RLC Todd thx 

message: Hi! I added a little guide on the page for people who are doing internet research to get them started in the right direction. Let me know what you think!  Owenwitt (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section - Guide to Internet Research