Wikipedia talk:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
WhatamIdoing (talk | contribs) |
Will Beback (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 53:
::I gave the extreme example on purpose, because it's a clear-cut example. An article from 20 years ago might go either way. A rough rule of thumb is not guaranteed to work well for borderline cases.
::All newspaper articles are certainly not primary sources, and this page makes no such claim. However, all "eyewitness news" reports are primary sources (by definition), and basically all the newspaper articles that appear within hours of an event are primary sources (for purely practical reasons). [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 18:36, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
:::That's not true. If a news report from hours after a political debate includes analysis from experts then that's clearly a secondary source. I think a lot of the text in this section is misleading and doesn't address the topic of the section. <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]] [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]] </b> 22:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
| |||