I recently posted two answers:
- Biblical Calendar - New Month 1 or 2 Days After Dark Moon?
- Was the division of Holy Bible into Old and New Testaments divinely inspired?
Both were criticized (rightfully so) for the quality of the sources I used:
- In the first, I quoted several scriptures to make my point, but I gave credit to a booklet where I had previously seen that list.
- In the second, I quoted sections of an article that presented an interesting explanation, and of course gave appropriate credit.
Is there a better way of crediting or presenting ideas from non-reliable sources, when the ideas themselves are potentially good?
- Should I have simply not bothered to say where I found the list (implying that I had compiled it myself)?
- Should I have rewritten the relevant sections of the article in my own words and not mentioned where I first heard the idea (implying that I had thought of it myself)?