HIS 1357 World War II

The handout below lists some of the questions that you will want to ask of the (largely "published") primary sources you identify, whether via the book catalogs and article databases or (say) a Google search; and that should, of course, be applied also to those proposed for your consideration by way of example under France, Germany, and Great Britain above:

And here is one composed more with secondary (and tertiary) sources in mind:

The boxes below were created by my predecessor in History, Adrienne Meier:

Is this book a good one to use? Here are some ways to tell:

• Check the publisher. If the publisher is a university press, the book is a good one. If the publisher is a regular publisher, take a look at some of the other things they have published. Is it a big publisher? That is a good sign. Is it a small publisher? Even a small publisher can put out good books, but small publishers that are close to their subject matter can be particularly good (for example, a publisher in Washington State that publishes books about Seattle is probably a good one, even if it is small).
• Check the author. What are the author's credentials? Has the author written many books on this topic? An author that has a PhD or has written a lot on the topic is a good bet, especially one that has written about the topic for many years. Is the author close to the subject matter, that is, from the area or related to the person, or something similar? That can be a good sign, but it can also mean that the author is biased toward the subject. If you use such an author, be sure to acknowledge in your work somehow that the author has a bias.
• Check the date. Unlike other subjects, a more recent work in history is not automatically a better one. But a work written before a major change can have limitations - think of a work on terrorism written before 9/11 - and a more recent work can sometimes have a bias towards the present (that is, it paints past things in a poor light just because they were in the past). The publication date isn't a guarantee of good quality, but it can change how you use an item in your own work.

Ultimately, use your good judgement. And consulting a wide range of books can help you get a sense of what a good book on the topic looks like!

Is this article a good one to use? Here are some ways to tell:

• Check the publisher. If the publisher is a scholarly journal, the article is a good one. Scholarly journals often have words like  "Journal of," "Quarterly," or "Review" in the title. Scholarly journals also come out with a new issue no more than once a month, so sometimes looking at a publication schedule can help you tell.
• Check the author. What are the author's credentials? Has the author written many articles or books on this topic? An author that has a PhD or has written a lot on the topic is a good bet, especially one that has written about the topic for many years. Is the author close to the subject matter, that is, from the area or related to the person, or something similar? That can be a good sign, but it can also mean that the author is biased toward the subject. If you use such an author, be sure to acknowledge in your work somehow that the author has a bias.
• Check the date. Unlike other subjects, a more recent work in history is not automatically a better one. But a work written before a major change can have limitations - think of a work on terrorism written before 9/11 - and a more recent work can sometimes have a bias towards the present (that is, it paints past things in a poor light just because they were in the past). The publication date isn't a guarantee of good quality, but it can change how you use an item in your own work.

Ultimately, use your good judgement. And consulting a wide range of articles can help you get a sense of what a good article on the topic looks like!