Google & Wikipedia vs. ProQuest Research Tools

16 04 2011

When it is a good idea to use Google or Wikipedia versus ProQuest research tools (like eLibrary, SIRS, Platinum, Research Library, CSA, or CultureGrams)? Find out how Google stacks up against deep research tools in this short video, perfect for helping researchers decide which resource to use for what and when. Find our more about ProQuest’s reference solutions and sign up for free trials at http://www.proquest.com, http or http://www.proquestk12.com (US and Canada school libraries and teachers). This video was produced and voiced over by Tim McLain of ProQuest — tim.mclain@proquest.com.


Actions

Information

7 responses

16 04 2011
GravWave

@pcrdh

uh hu, right. You got a link to back that up? I used:

d-wave
dwave
d wave

the last one had 27 results, NONE of them dealing with quantum computers. They just took individual parts like “d” and “wave” and said, “let’s find all articles with the letter D and the word Wave in it.” If it were me, I’d just use D-Wave’s site.

16 04 2011
pcrdh

@GravWave

Very simple Proquest searching yielded 275,850 articles on D Wave, i suspect you mean Bose EC (7,480 results) and quasi crystals gives 12,150 results. All from peer reviewed journals generally meaning that each article is vetted by a group of experts and probably gets a run in the journal ahead of others on the same topic. Looks like Father Electric needs to brush up on his search skills.

16 04 2011
wetwarex

FatherElectric (see below) reminds me of The Office’s Michael Scott, who raved: “Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information.”

And GravWave would have gotten a better search result by searching for “Bose Einstein Condensation”.

16 04 2011
DefenceSpeech

This video only loads about a minute in and then freezes.

16 04 2011
FatherElectric

This is BS. Professional academic sources do have their place, but they are not necessarily “quality” sources (why does he keep saying that word).

All info is biased and slanted. That’s why it’s called information! There is no such thing as a “credible source”. This guy is selling you a bag of goods.

I wonder did he google himself?

16 04 2011
GravWave

for example, I searched for information about D-Wave or even DD-214’s. I even searched for information on quasi crystals and Boes Einstein Condensation, yet nothing appeared. If you know what any of these things are, give yourself a pat on the back, because you know more than pro quest.

Just do what I do. Scope out the source. Who is it, why should we listen to them, are there several other credible sources to back up their claims? Do they have anything to gain by lying? Just stuff like that.

16 04 2011
PwnedBySkater

a bit laggy




%d bloggers like this: