Suggest HN: Submit Reliable Sources with Original Titles & Canonical URLs
1. Prefer Original Sources
The Hacker News guidelines say "Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter." Blogspam is highly disfavored here on HN. Everyone prefers submissions of sources that actually do some fact-checking and research before writing.
2. Prefer Original Titles
There was some controversy about this a while ago, and the most recent update to the guidelines here emphasizes preferring original titles.
The guidelines now say, "please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." That's a rewrite from an earlier version of the guidelines.
Most titles devised by journalists actually grab attention better (and with less spin on the discussion) than most titles made up by HN participants. I've seen really, really good new articles fail to gain the discussion they deserve mostly because they are submitted with a modified title.
3. Prefer Canonical URLs
A trickier issue is what URL to submit, from sources that give articles multiple URLs. Some sites distinguish print versions of articles or mobile-viewable versions of articles from the main view of an article with different URLs. The suggestion of experienced users is to prefer the "canonical URL" for every article submitted here. Some readers like to read mobile versions, and some like to read print versions, and some like to read one-page versions. The canonical URL should either autodetect a reader's Web client or format to a preestablished user preference from many of the better sites on the Web. Other URLs have unpredictable behavior when submitted to HN and read on many other users' devices--with an especially annoying behavior being starting a print job as soon as the page is accessed. Just submit the canonical URL, and let the user decide what to do from there.