Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
WhatamIdoing (talk | contribs) Undid revision 451760858 by Will Beback (talk) This isn't over-reach. It's supported by reliable sources, and the example is obvious |
WhatamIdoing (talk | contribs) →Are newspapers secondary or primary sources?: Expanded with links to the policy |
||
Line 107:
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 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. Some editors—especially those with no training in historiography—incorrectly call these newspaper articles "secondary sources". [[Wikipedia:No_original_research#cite_note-2|The relevant policy]] names newspaper articles as an example of primary sources. However, while this is generally true, there are some exceptions.
These kinds of media reports are primary sources:
Line 115:
* ''Reports on events:'' The newspaper journalist describes the discussions from a meeting of the local school agency. The radio announcer reports the arrest of an alleged criminal.
* ''Human interest stories:'' The magazine publishes a touching story about a child with a congenital heart defect. The society column in the newspaper reports the birthday of a prominent local citizen.
* ''Interviews and reports of interviews'': The reporter quotes the politician's speech. The talk show host interviews a celebrity. (Defined as a primary source [[Wikipedia:No_original_research#cite_note-2|by policy]].)
* ''Investigative reports:'' The journalist goes undercover and reports his or her experiences. The journalist meets with people and reads documents to uncover corruption. (Defined as a primary source [[Wikipedia:No_original_research#cite_note-2|by policy]].)
* ''Editorials, opinions, and [[op-ed]]s:'' The newspaper editorial staff announces its support for a proposed law. The syndicated columnist explain his idea for fixing the economy. (Defined as a primary source [[Wikipedia:No_original_research#cite_note-2|by policy]].)
These kinds of media reports are usually, or at least might be, secondary sources:
* ''Historical reports:'' A special television program is broadcast to mark the 60th anniversary of the end of [[World War II]]. A newspaper column lists the events reported in that newspaper on the same date from 25, 50, 75, and 100 years before.
* ''Analytical reports:'' The newspaper publishes a week-long series of articles on health care systems in the nation. This is not merely a piece that provides one or two comments from someone who is labeled an "analyst" in the source, but is a major work that collects, compares, and analyzes information.
* ''Book reviews:'' Book reviews are generally secondary sources if they provide information beyond a basic description of the book's contents. Book reviews are often a mix of primary and secondary material: e.g., an analysis of some aspect of the book (secondary) plus the reviewer's rating or opinion about the book (primary).
| |||