# What makes a good cite? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 4, 2000, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-makes-a-good-cite/6783 "2000-02-04T03:11:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 1
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2000, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-makes-a-good-cite/6783/1 "2000-02-04T03:11:00Z")
The nature of these boards leads to people making various claims of “fact”. Often the “fact” is challenged, and a cite or a source is requested. This is good to a point, but what happens when there are different claims of truth for the same “fact”? For example, \*\* A \*\*says that the percentage of homosexuals in the population is 1%, **B** says the percentage is 10% and **C** says it is 6%. A sharp poster notices the marked difference and asks **A** , **B** , and **C** to support their claims. **A** posts a link to a university study that supports his claim. **B** cites the Kinsey Report, and **C** refers to GLAAD. ## So, the three posters have shown that they are not talking out of the sides of their mouths, but is anything settled? Does one cite hold sway over the others? Obviously, citing something that you just posted on your home page would be looked at with suspicion, but what about when there is valid support for each claim? If I was discussing Lucy Lawless but I wrote Lucy Topless, would that be a Freudian typo? --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-makes-a-good-cite/6783)._