Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 1276506447 by 5.209.34.218 (talk)
Simplify
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 92:
==="Primary" does not mean "bad"===
{{shortcut|WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD}}
"Primary" is not, and should not be, a bit of jargon used by Wikipedians to mean "bad" or "unreliable" or "unusable". While some primaryPrimary sources arecan not fullybe independent, they can be authoritative, high-quality, accurate, fact-checked, expert-approved, subject to editorial control, and/or published by a reputable publisher.
 
Primary sources {{em|can}} be [[WP:Identifying reliable sources|reliable]], and they {{em|can}} be used. Sometimes, a primary source is even the best possible source, such as when you are supporting a direct [[WP:Manual of Style#Quotations|quotation]]. In such cases, the original document is the best source because the original document will be free of any errors or misquotations introduced by subsequent sources.
Line 118:
 
==Are news-reporting media secondary or primary sources?==
{{shortcut|WP:PRIMARYNEWS|WP:SECONDARYNEWS}}
The term "news-reporting media" is used here in the sense of actual [[newspaper|newspapers]] and other media reporting news in a manner similar to newspapers.