Isn’t this an actual thing? Pretty sure I was told by some instructor not to use references older than a decade or two. Unless the subject is very elementary older sources are more likely to be obsolete
In chemistry a lot of the foundational synthesis and work is as old as the 60s and 70s; people build on it, but in some cases those early papers said pretty much all there is to be said on a topic, so there’s no reason to republish on it.
I’ve had to cite papers as old as the late 30s before, because no one has ever found anything to fix or correct about their work! Pretty impressive if you ask me, given how few tools they had.
Isn’t this an actual thing? Pretty sure I was told by some instructor not to use references older than a decade or two. Unless the subject is very elementary older sources are more likely to be obsolete
Depends on the subject. Historians use a lot older materials more regularly for obvious reasons.
Ofc
In chemistry a lot of the foundational synthesis and work is as old as the 60s and 70s; people build on it, but in some cases those early papers said pretty much all there is to be said on a topic, so there’s no reason to republish on it.
I’ve had to cite papers as old as the late 30s before, because no one has ever found anything to fix or correct about their work! Pretty impressive if you ask me, given how few tools they had.