Wikipedia talk:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
WhatamIdoing (talk | contribs) |
Traumnovelle (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 228:
:which would you choose? If you pick the latter, then you have to agree that "sometimes" a primary source is the best possible source.
:BTW, [[WP:NPOV]] barely mentions primary/secondary sources at all, and [[WP:PSTS]] (the only section in NOR to mention the distinction at all) does not require secondary sources for everything. We should not have whole articles [[WP:Based upon]] a primary source, but you are allowed to cite them. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 23:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
::Why can't you use the secondary source to establish weight and the primary source to correct a mistake? Although the primary source could have a typographical error and minor changes to a quote shouldn't be considered incorrect. I only ever see this policy linked to to justify bad use of primary sources. A primary source cannot establish importance/notability. [[User:Traumnovelle|Traumnovelle]] ([[User talk:Traumnovelle|talk]]) 00:54, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
| |||