Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 18:25, 17 September 2011

Revision as of 03:35, 18 September 2011

Line 97:

==Secondary sources for notability==

Just because topics are covered in primary sources does not mean that they are notable. Appearing in the phone book is not a sign of notability, for example. Secondary sources are needed to establish notability for the purposes of deciding which articles to keep. However topics that are only covered briefly or in poor quality secondary sources may not meet the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]].

Secondary sources can also help guide editors in deciding which primary sources are worth using. It is particularly appropriate to cite primary sources on a topic when secondary sources have already referenced them.

One rough rule of thumb for identifying primary sources is this: if the source is noticeably closer to the event than you are, then it's a primary source. For example, if an event occurred on January 1, 1800, and a newspaper article appeared about it the next day, then Wikipedia (and all historians) considers the newspaper article a primary source.

However, Wikipedia fairly often writes about current events. As a result, an event may happen on Monday afternoon, may be written about in Tuesday morning's newspapers, and may be added to Wikipedia just minutes later. Many editors—especially those with no training in historiography—call these newspaper articles "secondary sources", by which they mean "please don't delete this article" sources.

Typically, very recent newspaper articles are mis-labeled as a "secondary source" during AFDs, by way of trying to finesse [[WP:GNG|the general notability guideline's]] requirement that secondary sources exist, when no true secondary sources actually exist. It is difficult, if not impossible, to find true secondary sources for [[WP:MILL|run-of-the-mill events]] and [[breaking news]]. Typically, editors are willing to overlook this error for recent events. However, once a couple of years have passed, if no true secondary sources can be found, the article is usually deleted.