Encyclopedias and more
Encyclopedias are not a bad place to start. Make sure you are using a reputable one. Find one that cites its sources (even Wikipedia does this). Use the encyclopedia to learn general concepts about your topic, keywords, and commonly used references, but do not cite it in your paper.
Recommended Encyclopedias - where possible, please access these through ClassLink.
World Book - Advanced
Gale Virtual Reference (access via ClassLink)
TeachingBooks.net << not technically an encyclopedia, but a great resource for background on literature (access via ClassLink)
United Streaming << might need a password, some materials might be suitable for final paper; coming soon to ClassLink
The following information is excerpted from https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm
The Following are Usually NOT Acceptable References
Class Lecture Notes
Radio and TV Broadcasts
Why? For the most part, they are not original sources. So why do we have encyclopedias and textbooks? To provide an overview or introduction to a topic for complete beginners. These are meant to get you started on a subject; they are not research documents. If you want to document a point in a textbook or encyclopedia article, locate the original source for the idea. Start with the sources cited by the textbook or encyclopedia. I have written tons of encyclopedia articles, and I strive to do the most accurate job possible, but I know the limitations of encyclopedias from all angles.
But won't that take a lot of time? Yes. That's why you start work on research papers as soon as they are assigned.
I can't use the Internet? Not the way most people do. Most of what is on the Internet is the electronic equivalent of the other print sources listed and therefore not acceptable as a college reference. Also it's unregulated and there is no quality control. You can only use the Internet if it's the equivalent of other acceptable sources.
If the medium itself is the subject of your paper: for example, how textbooks have treated gender roles over time, or how dictionaries have defined controversial terms, or how popular magazines have treated AIDS. If your subject is children's literature, The Cat in the Hat might be an acceptable reference.
If the topic is a fast-moving one where most of the information has flowed through the news media, newspapers may be acceptable. However, for subjects like AIDS, Comet Hale-Bopp, or the Space Shuttle, where the quantity of published information is huge, newspapers are not acceptable.
Many instructors forbid reference to Wikipedia at all. This surprises me, because I didn't think many professors allowed encyclopedia citations, period. Don't do it even if permitted, as a general rule. Just like you can drive 65 miles an hour in a dense fog, but it's not a good idea. Wikipedia suffers from the problem that it is not a primary source and has very weak quality control. More recently it's suffered from the problem of deliberate sabotage, vandalism, and censorship. It's generally reliable for checking routine facts and extremely specialized topics, and it's often the only source on popular culture. But don't use it if you're not familiar enough with the subject matter to spot biases or errors.