Content deleted Content added
→Significance of source classification: removed duplicate WLink Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit App section source |
→Classifying sources: Added link Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit App section source |
||
Line 13:
{{see also|Secondary source#Classification of sources|Source text#Classification in levels}}
Many sources can be considered either primary or secondary, depending on the context in which they are examined.<ref name=Kragh/> Moreover, the distinction between ''primary'' and ''secondary'' sources is subjective and contextual,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Dalton| first1=Margaret Stieg|last2=Charnigo|first2=Laurie|title=Historians and Their Information Sources|journal=College & Research Libraries|date=September 2004|volume=65|issue=5|page=419| doi=10.5860/crl.65.5.400|url=http://crl.acrl.org/content/65/5/400.full.pdf+html|access-date=3 January 2017|doi-access=free}} {{open access}}</ref> so that precise definitions are difficult to make.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Delgadillo|first1=Roberto|last2=Lynch|first2=Beverly|title=Future Historians: Their Quest for Information|url=http://crl.acrl.org/content/60/3/245.full.pdf+html|journal=College & Research Libraries|date=May 1999|volume=60|issue=3 |pages=245–259, at 253|quote=[T]he same document can be a primary or a secondary source depending on the particular analysis the historian is doing.|doi=10.5860/crl.60.3.245|doi-access=free}} {{open access}}</ref> A [[book]] review, when it contains the opinion of the reviewer about the book rather than a summary of the book, becomes a primary source.<ref name="Princeton">{{Cite web|url=http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=book%20review|title=Book reviews |access-date=22 September 2011 |publisher=Princeton |year=2011 |author=Princeton|work=Scholarly definition document }}</ref><ref name="VirginiaTech">{{Cite web |url=http://www.lib.vt.edu/find/byformat/bookreviews.html |title=Book reviews |access-date=22 September 2011 |publisher=Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University |year=2011 |author=Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University |work=Scholarly definition document |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110910082750/http://www.lib.vt.edu/find/byformat/bookreviews.html |archive-date=10 September 2011 }}</ref>
If a historical text discusses old documents to derive a new historical conclusion, it is considered to be a primary source for the new conclusion. Examples in which a source can be both primary and secondary include an obituary<ref name=Duffin>{{Cite book|last=Duffin|first=Jacalyn|title=History of Medicine: A Scandalously Short Introduction|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=__oDQ6yDO7kC&q=%22secondary+source%22+historiography&pg=PA366|year=1999|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=0-8020-7912-1|page=366}}</ref> or a survey of several volumes of a journal counting the frequency of articles on a certain topic.<ref name=Duffin/>
| |||