Bibliography: Groundhogging

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408

Firestone, L. (2013, October 15). Dating resolutions: 7 characteristics of an ideal partner. PsychAlive. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.psychalive.org/dating-resolutions-7-characteristics-of-an-ideal-partner/

Firestone, L. (2017, February 8). Why do people have a type? Psychology Today. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/compassion-matters/201702/why-do-people-have-type#:~:text=The%20reason%20we%20keep%20winding,be%20part%20of%20our%20personality.

Holohan, M. (2017, March 24). Do you have a type? science says yes, but it's not who you think. TodayShow. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.today.com/health/romantic-type-thing-not-what-we-thought-study-says-t109578

Hong, H. (2017, July 24). This is why you always end up dating your "type," according to science. The Healthy. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.thehealthy.com/family/relationships/why-you-have-a-type-relationship/

IMDb.com. (1993, February 12). Groundhog day. IMDb. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/

Martin, S. (2020, October 22). 6 tips for ending a cycle of unhealthy relationships. Psychology Today. Retrieved March 5, 2023, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/conquering-codependency/202010/6-tips-ending-cycle-unhealthy-relationships

Polymeneas, E. (2022, April 29). What is groundhogging and is it ruining your dating life? The Advertiser. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/lifestyle/what-is-groundhogging-and-is-it-ruining-your-dating-life/news-story/7972dc635ca9afc94e8eb3027b7d980a

Sifferlin, A. (2015, October 1). Yes, you really do have a 'type,' science says. Time. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://time.com/4057616/yes-you-really-do-have-a-type-science-says/

Uniyal, P. (2023, February 28). Are you groundhogging? 5 ways it ruins your dating life or relationships. Hindustan Times. Retrieved March 5, 2023, from https://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle/relationships/are-you-groundhogging-5-ways-it-ruins-your-dating-life-or-relationships-101677587366475.html

Weiss, S. (2022, November 29). 10 signs you might be "groundhogging" and how to stop. www.top10.com. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.top10.com/dating/10-signs-you-might-be-groundhogging-and-how-to-stop

Uniyal, P. (2023, February 28). Are you groundhogging? 5 ways it ruins your dating life or relationships. Hindustan Times. Retrieved March 5, 2023, from https://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle/relationships/are-you-groundhogging-5-ways-it-ruins-your-dating-life-or-relationships-101677587366475.html

Bibliography As you gather the sources for your Wikipedia contribution, think about the following: Is the source from a reliable publication? Reliable publications include established newspapers, academic journals and books, textbooks, and other published sources with reputations for accuracy and fact-checking. Unreliable sources include blog posts and other self-published works, press releases, and social media posts. Is the source verifiable? In order for a source to be considered verifiable, other editors should be able to consult the source. Is the source independent of the subject? Is the source connected in any way to the subject? This is especially important when writing biographies or about organizations. For example, if you were writing a biography, sources like the person's webpage or personal blog would not be considered independent. Is the source primary or secondary? Primary sources include first-hand accounts, autobiographies, and other original content. Wikipedia allows limited use of primary sources, but typically only for straightforward, descriptive statements of facts, and only if they are published and verifiable without requiring specialized knowledge. Secondary sources should be the main basis for a biography on Wikipedia. If you're working on a topic related to medicine or psychology, ensure that your sources follow these special guidelines. If you're creating a new article, consider the following: Ensure that your topic meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. In order for a topic to meet the notability requirement, you must be able to identify 2-3 sources that are reliable, verifiable, and independent of the subject you're writing about. Finding sufficient sources to establish notability can be especially hard when writing about people or organizations. Sources that are not independent of the subject might be useful additions, but don't count towards the notability requirement. Wikipedia has developed special guidelines for writing about living persons. Please follow these carefully. Wikipedia has a series of guidelines for writing about different categories of people, such as academics and artists. If you're trying to create a new entry about a living person, please look at these carefully. If you're not sure whether a source is reliable, ask a librarian! If you have questions about Wikipedia's sourcing rules, you can use the Get Help button below to contact your Wikipedia Expert. Get Help

This is where you will compile the bibliography for your Wikipedia assignment. Add the name and/or notes about what each source covers, then use the "Cite" button to generate the citation for that source.

• Example: Luke, Learie. 2007. Identity and secession in the Caribbean: Tobago versus Trinidad, 1889–1980.^[1]
  • This is a book published by a university press, so it should be a reliable source. It also covers the topic in some depth, so it's helpful in establishing notability.
• Example: Galeano, Gloria; Bernal, Rodrigo (2013-11-08). "Sabinaria , a new genus of palms (Cryosophileae, Coryphoideae, Arecaceae) from the Colombia-Panama border". Phytotaxa.^[2]
  • This is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, so it should be a reliable source. It covers the topic in some depth, so it's helpful in establishing notability.
• Example: Baker, William J.; Dransfield, John (2016). "Beyond Genera Palmarum: progress and prospects in palm systematics". Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society.^[3]
  • This is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, so it should be a reliable source for a specific fact. Since it only dedicates a few sentences to the topic, it can't be used to establish notability.
• ...