Misplaced Pages

:Evaluating sources: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:37, 19 December 2007 editJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 edits →Examples← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:45, 19 July 2023 edit undoBD2412 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, IP block exemptions, Administrators2,449,391 editsm →Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources: Clean up spacing errors around ref tags., replaced: /ref>E → /ref> ETag: AWB 
(91 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{essay|WP:EVAL|WP:EVALUATE|interprets=the ]}}
{{proposed|]}}


{{nutshell|When using primary sources, editors should stick to describing what the sources say. Any interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims require a secondary source.}}
{{nutshell|Sources should be critically evaluated within the context of the articles in which they are used. Any source that has not itself been evaluated prior to publication must only be used with caution. Only quotes or factual, non-analytical statements should be sourced to primary sources.}}


'''Evaluating sources''' refers to assessment of the use of sources in Misplaced Pages, within the context of relevant content policies. Source evaluation is usually facilitated by classing sources and their uses as ''primary'', ''secondary'', or ''tertiary''. Source evaluation should always include checking for source bias and assessment of arguments used by sources. This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies. Part of evaluating a source is deciding whether it is a ''primary'', ''secondary'', or ''tertiary'' source. For the policy on sourcing issues, see ] of ], and ]. If there are inconsistencies between this page and the policies, please update this page.


These are general rules. The decision as to what type of sources are more suitable on any given situation is a matter of common sense, good editorial judgment, and context, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve ] among the involved editors. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to ]. The decision as to which sources are appropriate in any given situation is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve ]. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to ].

==Selection==
{{seealso|WP:LIBRARY|Misplaced Pages:Reference Desk}}


== Types of sources == == Types of sources ==
Information sources are commonly distinguished between primary, secondary, and tertiary categories. These concepts can change depending on ], context, and academic discipline. What is considered a secondary source now, might be used as a primary source in twenty years, and depending on how the source is used, and whether the topic is literature, history, or science or some other field, the concept of the source will be different.<ref name="Stebbins">{{citation Sources of information are commonly categorized as ], ], or ]s. In brief, a primary source is one close to the event with firsthand knowledge (for example, an eyewitness); a secondary source is at least one step removed (for example, a book about an event written by someone not involved in it); and a tertiary source is an encyclopaedia or textbook that provides a general overview.
| last = Stebbins
| first = Leslie Foster
| title = Student Guide to Research in the Digital Age
| publisher = Libraries Unlimited
| location =
| year = 2006
| pages = 61-79
| id = ISBN 1591580994
}}</ref>


The way these concepts are applied to particular sources can change over time. A newspaper article that we regard as a secondary source now, might be regarded as a primary source in 100 years, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years from now.<ref name="Stebbins">Stebbins, Leslie Foster. ''Student Guide to Research in the Digital Age''. Libraries Unlimited'', 2006, pp. 61–79. {{ISBN|1591580994}}</ref>
To minimize conflict and confusion, ensure that all editors are using the terms in the same way, and understand how ''you'' are using the terms.


=== Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources === === Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources ===
{{anchor|ps|primary|primary source|primary sources}} {{anchor|ps|primary|primary source|primary sources}}
{{See|Misplaced Pages:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources}}
*'''Primary sources''' are sources of original work, as well as historical items and references close to the subject. Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.
*'''Primary sources''' are sources of original work, as well as historical items and references close to the subject. Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, photographs, artwork, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.

{{anchor|ss|secondary|secondary source|secondary sources}} {{anchor|ss|secondary|secondary source|secondary sources}}
*'''Secondary sources''' are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims.<ref>{{citation|last=Thomas|first=Susan|title=Research Help:Primary vs. Secondary Sources|year=2007<!--April 03, 2007-->| *'''Secondary sources''' are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims.<ref>{{citation|last=Thomas|first=Susan|title=Research Help:Primary vs. Secondary Sources|year=2007<!--April 03, 2007-->|
url=http://lib1.bmcc.cuny.edu/help/sources.html||publisher=Borough of Manhattan Commmunity College, A. Philip Randolph Memorial Library|location=New York}} notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".</ref><ref> states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."</ref> They are best used for representing significant points of view.<ref name="Turabian">{{citation url=http://lib1.bmcc.cuny.edu/help/sources.html|publisher=Borough of Manhattan Commmunity College, A. Philip Randolph Memorial Library|location=New York}} notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".</ref><ref> states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."</ref> Depending on the field, these may include textbooks, review articles, and peer-reviewed articles publishing original research. They are best used for representing significant points of view.<ref name="Turabian">{{citation
| last = Turabian | last = Turabian
| first = Kate L | first = Kate L
Line 36: Line 24:
| last2= Booth|first2=Wayne C.|authorlink2=Wayne C. Booth | last2= Booth|first2=Wayne C.|authorlink2=Wayne C. Booth
| last3=Colomb|first3=Gregory G. | last3=Colomb|first3=Gregory G.
| last4=Williams|last4=Joseph M. | last4=Williams|first4=Joseph M.
<!-- and the staff of the University of Chicago Press --> <!-- and the staff of the University of Chicago Press -->
| title = A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations | title = A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations
| publisher = UC Press | publisher = UC Press
| location = Chicago | location = Chicago
| year = 2007 | year = 2007
| pages = 25-27 | pages = 25–27
| id = ISBN 0-226-82337-7 | id = {{ISBN|0-226-82337-7}}
}}</ref> }}</ref>


{{anchor|ts|tertiary|tertiary source|tertiary sources}} {{anchor|ts|tertiary|tertiary source|tertiary sources}}
*'''Tertiary sources''' are materials that are based on secondary sources.<ref name="Turabian"/> This includes publications such as general encyclopedias or other ]; introductory textbooks may also be considered tertiary to the extent they sum up widely accepted results of large amounts of primary and secondary sources. *'''Tertiary sources''' are materials that provide an overview of primary and secondary sources,<ref name="Turabian"/> such as encyclopedias, textbooks, and other ]. Misplaced Pages is a tertiary source.
==Evaluation==
The following section provides guidance on the use of sources as it applies to specific content policies.


These definitions are not mutually exclusive. Primary sources, for example, might draw on secondary sources to make interpretive, analytic, or synthetic claims. In such cases, sources should be evaluated according to how they are used.
=== Neutral point of view ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view}}
Maintaining a neutral point of view is one of Misplaced Pages's most fundamental policies. Because of this, it is important to evaluate sources based on their viewpoint, and ensure that all relevant major viewpoints are presented in a neutral way.


=== Examples ===
Often, secondary sources introduce a distinct viewpoint as to the primary source being discussed. The secondary source may dispute the primary source, question its validity or authenticity, or "spin" the source according to a particular ideology or agenda. Therefore, while primary sources are often biased, secondary sources have an opportunity to introduce ''further'' bias, or to introduce bias where none existed in the primary source. In addition, the meaning of primary sources might change based on the historical context. Thus, secondary sources will often discuss the historical context of the primary source, and such information is often invaluable, and frequently there is a consensus as to the context within the academic field. Such views as to the context are almost always relevant to the discussion.


==== Primary sources ====
Therefore, it is important when using secondary sources to ensure that all important viewpoints about the primary source are represented in a balanced way, taking care to avoid ]. For example, if a primary source is the '']'', and experts in the field disagree about the meaning of a particular passage, make sure that a sufficient number of secondary sources are presented to accurately reflect the variety of opinions within that field of study. Also, it would be important to ensure that the Biblical text presented as "authoritative" is the primary source itself, and not an interpretive translation or paraphrase from an opinionated secondary source. In many cases, of course, where the meaning or significance of the primary source is clear, and it is not disputed within the field, secondary sources are not required.
{|class="wikitable sortable"

Secondary sources may also be used a primary sources. Such sources serving a dual role are typically important and relevant to the topic, and represent points of view that should be presented. For example, if a secondary source is available that ''itself'' summarizes all the important points of view on an issue, and does so in a neutral manner, that secondary source may be cited as a ''primary'' source for the current state of academic thought within the field about the original source. If a secondary source was written by a historical contemporary of the primary source, that source may have significance beyond its role as a secondary source, and may also be primary, and often represents an important point of view as to the original meaning of the author and the relevant historical context.

In some cases, secondary sources may be interpreted or "spun" by contemporary sources that are even ''more'' secondary; if such doubly-secondary sources are cited, a sufficient number of them should be presented to ensure that the balance is neutral.{{dubious}}

=== Original research and verifiability===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research}}
{{seealso|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}}

All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to new analysis, syntheses or original conclusions that are not ]. Interpretive claims, analysis, or synthetic claims "that are challenged or likely to be challenged" (see ]) ''must be appropriately sourced''; they may not be original analysis by Misplaced Pages editors.

Information in an article must be ] in the references cited. Article statements generally should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, nor on passing comments. Passages open to interpretation should be precisely cited or avoided. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning or interpretation. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source's author(s).

Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Misplaced Pages, but no original interpretations or conclusions may be drawn from primary sources. Descriptions of primary sources must stay close to the original. Anyone, even a non-specialist, who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Misplaced Pages passage simply reflects the content of the primary source. In highly-technical articles, content need simply be ] by the intended audience, which may require technical knowledge and expertise.

Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation, and that to the extent that an article or particular part of an article relies on a primary source, that part of the article should:
* only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
*make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

If an interpretation is found within the primary source itself, such as a peer-reviewed journal article highlighting original scientific research, it may be cited directly without mediation by a secondary source if that interpretation is quoted or cited accurately without new commentary by the editor. This must be done very carefully due to the potential for abuse. To avoid any problems, always attribute the author of the interpretation in the body of the article.

Drawing conclusions not explicit in the reference cited is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references are cited in context and on topic.

Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary and/or secondary sources. "Common knowledge" claims may be cited to tertiary sources.

=== Biographies of living persons ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}}
Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources, it will violate the ] and ] policies. Material about living persons available solely in primary sources, in ], or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all in biographies of living people, either as sources or via external links.

Material about living persons, regardless of its source, must be carefully evaluated to ensure ], and avoid ]. Use of primary sources that were not evaluated prior to publication may easily lead to syntheses that constitute ], which is not permitted in Misplaced Pages and is particularly problematic in material about living persons.

Exert great care in using material from primary sources. Unless a reliable secondary source has ''already'' cited public records, ''do not use'' records that include personal details—such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses—or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents Where primary-source material has first been presented by a reliable secondary source, it ''may'' be acceptable to turn to open records to augment the secondary source, subject to the ] policy.<ref>See ] for an example.</ref>

=== Notability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Notability}}

A subject merits its own article on Misplaced Pages when the subject is important enough to have received acknowledgment in multiple reliable sources, ideally in ] that have analyzed the subject that the article will be discussing. If an article lacks ] that reasonably demonstrates the importance of the subject, it may be listed for ].

== Application ==

<!--merge examples into disciplines...Examples of '''primary sources''' include archaeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs.<ref>Definitions of primary sources:
*The define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event." They offer as examples: '''original documents''', such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews, letters, minutes, news film footage, official records, photographs, raw research data, and speeches; '''creative works''', such as art, drama, films, music, novels, poetry; and '''relics or artifacts''', such as buildings, clothing, DNA, furniture, jewelry, pottery.*The offers this definition: "Primary sources enable the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period. Primary sources were either created during the time period being studied, or were created at a later date by a participant in the events being studied (as in the case of memoirs) and they reflect the individual viewpoint of a participant or observer."</ref>Examples of '''secondary sources''' include ....Examples of '''tertiary sources''' include-->

=== In academic writing ===
Much has been written about the academic theory of source classification. This theory is not always used to distinguish primary and secondary sources; however, it is a good starting point to understanding how sources are often categorized roughly based on genre or description. In theoretical source classification, sources are classified according to how they are used, as follows:

*A '''primary source''' is a source cited for its original information or content not previously presented elsewhere.<!--
FOOTNOTE--><ref>{{Citation
|last=Duff
|first=Alistair
|title=The literature search: a library-based model for information skills instruction
|journal=Library Review
|year=1996
|volume=45
|issue=4
|pages=14–18
|doi=10.1108/00242539610115263
}} ("A primary source is defined here as a source containing new information authored by the original researcher(s) and not previously published elsewhere.").</ref><!--

--> They provide researchers with "direct, unmediated information about the object of study."<!--FOOTNOTE--><ref>{{Citation
|last1=Dalton
|first1=Margaret Steig
|last2=Charnigo
|first2=Laurie
|title=Historians and Their Information Sources
|url=http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crljournal/crl2004/crlseptember/dalton.pdf
|pages=400–25, at 416 n.3
|journal=College & Research Libraries
|volume=September
|year=2004
}}, citing U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2003), ''Occupational Outlook Handbook''; {{Citation
|last=Lorenz
|first=C.
|contribution=History: Theories and Methods
|volume=10
|page=6871
|editor-last1=Smelser
|editor-first1=Neil J.
|editor-last2=Bates
|editor-first2=Paul B.
|title=International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavior Sciences
|publisher=Elsevier
|publication-place=Amsterdam
|year=2001
}}.</ref>

*A '''secondary source''' is a source cited for its discussion or presentation of material previously presented elsewhere. Usually, but not always, secondary sources contain commentary or analysis of a primary source. Sometimes, however, a secondary source is merely a re-publication.

From a purely theoretical perspective, the distinction between primary and secondary sources is not a sharp one.<!--

FOOTNOTE--><ref>{{Citation
| last=Kragh
| first=Helge
| title=An Introduction to the Historiography of Science
| year=1989
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
| isbn=0521389216
| url=http://books.google.com/books?id=d2zy_QSq2b0C&pg=PA121&lpg=PA121&dq=%22secondary+source%22+historiography&source=web&ots=9v7A99Rzbf&sig=jNrIeEdaovpKIuX_jD9KlrGO2-4
|page=121
}} ("he distinction is not a sharp one. Since a source is only a source in a specific historical context, the same source object can be both a primary or secondary source according to what it is used for.")</ref><!--

--> The same source can be either primary or secondary, depending on how it is used,<!--

FOOTNOTE--><ref>Id.; {{Citation
|last1=Delgadillo
|first1=Roberto
|last2=Lynch
|first2=Beverly
|title=Future Historians: Their Quest for Information
|url=http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crljournal/backissues1999b/may99/delgadillo.pdf
|journal=College & Research Libraries
|year=1999
|pages=245–259, at 253
}} ("he same document can be a primary or a secondary source depending on the particular analysis the historian is doing"); {{Citation
|last1=Monagahn
|first1=E.J.
|last2=Hartman
|first2=D.K.
|year=2001
|title=Historical research in literacy
|journal=Reading Online
|volume=4
|issue=11
|url=http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=/articles/handbook/monaghan/index.html
}} (" source may be primary or secondary, depending on what the researcher is looking for.").</ref><!--

--> because ''primary'' and ''secondary'' are relative terms.<!--

FOOTNOTE--><ref>{{Citation
|last=Henige
|first=David
|title=Primary Source by Primary Source? On the Role of Epidemics in New World Depopulation
|journal=Ethnohistory
|volume=33
|issue=3
|year=1986
|pages=292–312, at 292
|doi=10.2307/481816
}} ("he term 'primary' inevitably carries a relative meaning insofar as it defines those pieces of information that stand in closest relationship to an event or process ''in the present state of our knowledge''. Indeed, in most instances the very nature of a primary source tells us that it is actually derivative.…istorians have no choice but to regard certain of the available sources as 'primary' since they are as near to truly original sources as they can now secure.").</ref>

=== In the sciences ===

; Peer-reviewed literature
When evaluating sources of scientific material, sources that were evaluated by someone other than the scientist / author when they were published are the most reliable. This includes peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals. The general rule is to ''always consider the source''. The critical element in evaluating the source of material that is to be included in Misplaced Pages ''was previously published in a source that reviewed that information''. Journal articles that have passed through the peer-review process are thus the most highly reliable sources of scientific information.

Peer-reviewed literature is ''reliable'' as a source for propositions, ideas, observations, and other scientific data. However, care must be taken that multiple propositions, ideas, observations, and other data are not stitched together to form a new proposition or idea. The sum total of a piece of writing in Misplaced Pages should not advance a unique or novel interpretation. This is ], even if each individual component is sourced to highly reliable peer-reviewed literature; ''original research may not be published in Misplaced Pages''.

; Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other non-peer-reviewed sources
Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and textbooks that distill peer-reviewed literature and scientific findings into lay-person language may be easier to understand for the non-expert. If available, they must be used carefully as they are further interpretations of the original work. Not all scientific topics will provide this sort of coverage. Lay-person language interpretations, if confusing or inaccurate, should be buttressed by reference to the original material.

Scientific findings that are originally presented in non-peer reviewed literature must be used with particular care, as they have not been reviewed for ''scientific'' accuracy. For example, a newspaper may run an article on a scientist and her latest work, or a scientist might maintain a blog about his research. The descriptions of the scientist's ''unpublished findings'', as published in the newspaper or on the blog, are not as reliable a description of that research as a peer-reviewed journal article. If it is important to discuss the findings in the Misplaced Pages article, the most reliable source available should be used. If a peer-reviewed article is published ''after'' a newspaper, blog, or other non-peer-reviewed publication of the research, both may be used, but in a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

; Review articles
Review articles are articles published within scientific journals that survey and synthesize the state of research in a particular area. Review articles can be very helpful in understanding a topic, and on-point review articles should be cited or included as "further research". Review articles, like encyclopedias or textbooks, may also be useful to cite for general propositions about a field. However, there are three issues to consider when using review articles. First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. A review article's summation of a paper's findings is less reliable than the paper itself, if there is any inconsistency between the two. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research. If possible, the summarized later research should be reviewed and cited ''directly'' when describing any points from that research; however, it is permissible to reference the review article as citing the earlier material. Third, a review article that advances new information or its own new synthesis may be cited for those propositions, just as any publication may. However, the source should be carefully evaluated because review articles may not be peer reviewed.

=== In the humanities ===
In the humanities, materials that are potential objects of academic research but do not themselves constitute academic research are considered "primary sources." In turn, the academic research that evaluates those primary sources are the "secondary sources."

Peer-reviewed journals are highly regarded "secondary sources," but caution needs to be applied when citing these sources since they may introduce new theories or hypothesis that by themselves cannot (yet) reflect the approval or disapproval of their academic community. Thus, the use of these sources should also be accompanied by other sources that acknowledge<!-- cf. next sentence-->/support the position that the source is being cited for. Such a reference might also provide an alternate opinion. In such a case, representing both opinions would also take the requirements of ] into consideration.

Typically, text books and articles in reliable reference works that are known to have been written by experts on the subject are often the only means to determine whether a statement in a secondary source has merit or not, or if it has not long since been superseded by another hypothesis that has since been overwhelmingly accepted. However, all reference works have a limited life-span, beyond which their articles are only of limited practical use. Some encyclopedias, even highly respected ones, have notoriously long update cycles with the result that they might contain articles that may be as much as 40 years old.

Thus, when evaluating sources, it is best to keep in mind that there will be other editors more knowledgeable of the subject that oneself might be, and if a statement in then discarded as outdated, the removal should be accepted with grace, and respected at face value in accord with ] policy. On the other hand, if you are yourself knowledgeable in the field, and you find such an outdated, but well entrenched, opinion being expressed as current then it may be preferable to keep the outdated statement while placing it in the necessary perspective.

== Examples ==

=== Primary sources ===
{|class="wikitable sortable"
|- |-
! field/discipline !! types of primary sources ! field/discipline !! types of primary sources
|- |-
|Anthropology||artifact, field notes, fossil, photograph |Anthropology||artifact, field notes, fossil, photograph
|- |-
|Art||architectural model or drawing, building or structure, letter, motion picture, organizational records, painting, personal account, photograph, print, sculpture, sketch book |Art||architectural model or drawing, building or structure, letter, motion picture, organizational records, painting, personal account, photograph, print, sculpture, sketch book
|- |-
|Biology||field notes, plant specimen, research report |Biology||field notes, plant specimen, research report
|- |-
|Economics||company statistics, consumer survey, data series |Economics||company statistics, consumer survey, data series
|- |-
|Engineering||building or structure, map, geological survey, patent, schematic drawing, technical report |Engineering||building or structure, map, geological survey, patent, schematic drawing, technical report
|- |-
|Government||government report, interview, letter, news report, personal account, press release, public opinion survey, speech, treaty or international agreement |Government||government report, interview, letter, personal account, press release, public opinion survey, speech, treaty or international agreement
|- |-
|History||artifact, diary, government report, interview, letter, map, news report, oral history, organizational records, photograph, speech, work of art |History||artifact, diary, government report, interview, letter, map, news report,<ref name=news>An article from an old newspaper is regarded as primary-source material for an historian looking back at that period, because it's an example of writing that stems directly from the timeframe and the society he's studying. However, a recent newspaper report of, for example, a car accident is a secondary source regarding that accident, unless the reporter was personally involved or an eye witness.</ref> oral history, organizational records, photograph, speech, work of art
|- |-
|Law||code, statute, court opinion, legislative report |Law||code, statute, court opinion, legislative report
|- |-
|Literature||contemporary review, interview, letter, manuscript, personal account, published work |Literature||contemporary review, interview, letter, manuscript, personal account, published work
|- |-
|Music||contemporary review, letter, personal account, score, sound recording |Music||contemporary review, letter, personal account, score, sound recording
|- |-
|Psychology||case study, clinical case report, experimental replication, follow-up study, longitudinal study, treatment outcome study |Psychology||case study, clinical case report, experimental replication, follow-up study, longitudinal study, treatment outcome study
|- |-
|Sociology||cultural artifact, interview, oral history, organizational records, statistical data, survey |Sociology||cultural artifact, interview, oral history, organizational records, statistical data, survey
|- |-
|}<small>{{cite web | title = Primary Sources, What Are They? | publisher = Lafayette College Libraries and Academic Information Resources | date = 2005 | url = http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~library/guides/primarysources/definitions.html | accessdate = 2007-12-19 }}</small> |}<small>{{cite web | title = Primary Sources, What Are They? | publisher = Lafayette College Libraries and Academic Information Resources | date = 2005 | url = http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~library/guides/primarysources/definitions.html | accessdate = 2007-12-19 }}</small>


=== Examples by field === ==== Examples by field ====


{| class="prettytable" width="95%" border="1" cols=3 0 {| class="wikitable" width="95%" border="1" cols=3 0
| width="15%" | <div align="center"><b>Discipline</b></div> | width="15%" | <div align="center"><b>Discipline</b></div>
| width="28%" | <div align="center"><b>Primary</b></div> | width="28%" | <div align="center"><b>Primary</b></div>
Line 289: Line 105:
| width="28%" | Psychology dictionary | width="28%" | Psychology dictionary
|- valign="top" |- valign="top"
| width="15%" rowspan="2" | <b>Science</b> | width="15%" rowspan="2" | <b>Biology</b>
| width="28%" rowspan="2" | Original research on nematodes published in a peer-reviewed journal | width="28%" rowspan="2" | Original research on nematodes published in a peer-reviewed journal
| width="28%" align="left" | <p>Biological abstracts | width="28%" align="left" | <p>Biological abstracts
</p> </p>
| width="28%" | <p></p> | width="28%" | <p></p>
Line 301: Line 117:
| width="28%" | Video of a play | width="28%" | Video of a play
| width="28%" | Biography of a playwright | width="28%" | Biography of a playwright
| width="28%" | Chronology of a play | width="28%" |
|} |}


<small>Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen - </small> <small>Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen – </small>

== Evaluation ==
=== Original research and verifiability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}}

] and ] are the two core content policies that determine how sources are used on Misplaced Pages. All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to analyses, syntheses, or original conclusions. Original analysis by Wikipedians may not be added to articles.

Edits should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning.

Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used, but any part of an article that relies on a primary source should:
* only make descriptive claims about the material found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
*make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary or secondary sources.

=== Biographies of living persons ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}}
Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources, it will violate the ], ], and ] policies, as well as ].

Material about living persons must be carefully evaluated to ensure ], and avoid ]. The use of primary sources may easily lead to syntheses that constitute ]. Editors should not use public records as a source about a subject &mdash; such as birth certificates, home evaluations, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, or trial transcripts &mdash; unless these have been used by a reliable, secondary source. For example, if writing about a subject who had a messy divorce, do not go the courthouse to retrieve court papers about it; instead, rely on secondary sources, such as mainstream newspapers, that have written about the divorce. If they have not written about it, nor should Misplaced Pages.

=== Notability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Notability}}
A subject merits its own article on Misplaced Pages when it is notable enough to have received acknowledgment in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. If an article lacks ] that reasonably demonstrate its importance, it may be listed for ].

== Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources ==
<!--merge examples into disciplines...Examples of '''primary sources''' include archaeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs.<ref>Definitions of primary sources:
*The define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event." They offer as examples: '''original documents''', such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews, letters, minutes, news film footage, official records, photographs, raw research data, and speeches; '''creative works''', such as art, drama, films, music, novels, poetry; and '''relics or artifacts''', such as buildings, clothing, DNA, furniture, jewelry, pottery.*The offers this definition: "Primary sources enable the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period. Primary sources were either created during the time period being studied, or were created at a later date by a participant in the events being studied (as in the case of memoirs) and they reflect the individual viewpoint of a participant or observer."</ref> Examples of '''secondary sources''' include ....Examples of '''tertiary sources''' include-->
=== In the sciences ===

; Peer-reviewed literature
When evaluating sources of scientific material, sources that were evaluated by someone other than the scientist / author when they were published are the most reliable. This includes peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals. The general rule is to ''always consider the source''. The critical element in evaluating the source of material that is to be included in Misplaced Pages ''was previously published in a source that reviewed that information''. Journal articles that have passed through the peer-review process are thus the most highly reliable sources of scientific information.

Peer-reviewed literature is ''reliable'' as a source for propositions, ideas, observations, and other scientific data. However, care must be taken that multiple propositions, ideas, observations, and other data are not stitched together to form a new proposition or idea. The sum total of a piece of writing in Misplaced Pages should not advance a unique or novel interpretation. This is ], even if each individual component is sourced to highly reliable peer-reviewed literature; ''original research may not be published in Misplaced Pages''.

; Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other non-peer-reviewed sources
Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and textbooks that distill peer-reviewed literature and scientific findings into lay-person language may be easier to understand for the non-expert. If available, they must be used carefully as they are further interpretations of the original work. This sort of coverage is not available for all scientific topics, and is not required to establish reliability of a scientific proposition. Lay-person language interpretations, if confusing or inaccurate, should be buttressed by reference to the original material. In a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

Scientific findings that are originally presented in non-peer reviewed literature must be used with particular care, as they have not been reviewed for ''scientific'' accuracy. For example, a newspaper may run an article on a scientist and her latest work, or a scientist might maintain a blog about his research. The descriptions of the scientist's ''previously unpublished findings'', as published in the newspaper or on the blog, are not as reliable a description of that research as a peer-reviewed journal article. If it is important to discuss such findings in the Misplaced Pages article, the most reliable source available should be used. If a peer-reviewed article is published ''after'' a newspaper, blog, or other non-peer-reviewed publication of the research, both may be used, but in a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

; Review articles
Review articles are articles published within scientific journals that survey and synthesize the state of research in a particular area. Review articles can be very helpful in understanding a topic, and on-point review articles should be cited or included as "further research". Review articles, like encyclopedias or textbooks, may also be useful to cite for general propositions about a field. However, there are three issues to consider when using review articles. First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research. If possible, the summarized later research should be reviewed and cited ''directly'' when describing any points from that research; however, it is permissible to reference the review article as citing the earlier material. Third, a review article that advances new information or its own new synthesis may be cited for those propositions, just as any publication may. However, the source should be carefully evaluated because review articles may not be peer reviewed

== See also ==
* ]
* ]
* ]


== References == == References ==
{{reflist}} {{reflist|2}}


{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}} {{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}

]

Latest revision as of 22:45, 19 July 2023

Essay on editing Misplaced Pages
This is an essay on the Primary sources policies.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.		Shortcuts
This page in a nutshell: When using primary sources, editors should stick to describing what the sources say. Any interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims require a secondary source.

This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies. Part of evaluating a source is deciding whether it is a primary, secondary, or tertiary source. For the policy on sourcing issues, see this section of Misplaced Pages:No original research, and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. If there are inconsistencies between this page and the policies, please update this page.

The decision as to which sources are appropriate in any given situation is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve consensus. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to seek some assistance in reaching an agreement.

Types of sources

Sources of information are commonly categorized as primary, secondary, or tertiary sources. In brief, a primary source is one close to the event with firsthand knowledge (for example, an eyewitness); a secondary source is at least one step removed (for example, a book about an event written by someone not involved in it); and a tertiary source is an encyclopaedia or textbook that provides a general overview.

The way these concepts are applied to particular sources can change over time. A newspaper article that we regard as a secondary source now, might be regarded as a primary source in 100 years, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years from now.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources
  • Primary sources are sources of original work, as well as historical items and references close to the subject. Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, photographs, artwork, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.

  • Secondary sources are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims. Depending on the field, these may include textbooks, review articles, and peer-reviewed articles publishing original research. They are best used for representing significant points of view.

  • Tertiary sources are materials that provide an overview of primary and secondary sources, such as encyclopedias, textbooks, and other compendia. Misplaced Pages is a tertiary source.

These definitions are not mutually exclusive. Primary sources, for example, might draw on secondary sources to make interpretive, analytic, or synthetic claims. In such cases, sources should be evaluated according to how they are used.

Examples

Primary sources

field/discipline types of primary sources
Anthropology artifact, field notes, fossil, photograph
Art architectural model or drawing, building or structure, letter, motion picture, organizational records, painting, personal account, photograph, print, sculpture, sketch book
Biology field notes, plant specimen, research report
Economics company statistics, consumer survey, data series
Engineering building or structure, map, geological survey, patent, schematic drawing, technical report
Government government report, interview, letter, personal account, press release, public opinion survey, speech, treaty or international agreement
History artifact, diary, government report, interview, letter, map, news report, oral history, organizational records, photograph, speech, work of art
Law code, statute, court opinion, legislative report
Literature contemporary review, interview, letter, manuscript, personal account, published work
Music contemporary review, letter, personal account, score, sound recording
Psychology case study, clinical case report, experimental replication, follow-up study, longitudinal study, treatment outcome study
Sociology cultural artifact, interview, oral history, organizational records, statistical data, survey

"Primary Sources, What Are They?". Lafayette College Libraries and Academic Information Resources. 2005. Retrieved 2007-12-19.

Examples by field

Discipline Primary  Secondary Tertiary
Art Painting Criticism of Vincent van Gogh Encyclopedia of Art
Engineering Patent Derwent World Patents Index Patent literature usage guide
History Autobiography Biography Biography index
Literature Novel Book about a genre of fiction Poetry Handbook
Psychology Notes from a clinical psychologist Monograph on learning disabilities Psychology dictionary
Biology Original research on nematodes published in a peer-reviewed journal

Biological abstracts

Review of current nematode research Biological abstracts
Theatre Video of a play Biography of a playwright

Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen – James Cook University

Evaluation

Original research and verifiability

Main pages: Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability

No Original Research and Verifiability are the two core content policies that determine how sources are used on Misplaced Pages. All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to analyses, syntheses, or original conclusions. Original analysis by Wikipedians may not be added to articles.

Edits should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning.

Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used, but any part of an article that relies on a primary source should:

  • only make descriptive claims about the material found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
  • make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary or secondary sources.

Biographies of living persons

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons

Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources, it will violate the No original research, Verifiability, and Notability policies, as well as Biographies of living persons.

Material about living persons must be carefully evaluated to ensure neutral point of view, and avoid undue weight. The use of primary sources may easily lead to syntheses that constitute original research. Editors should not use public records as a source about a subject — such as birth certificates, home evaluations, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, or trial transcripts — unless these have been used by a reliable, secondary source. For example, if writing about a subject who had a messy divorce, do not go the courthouse to retrieve court papers about it; instead, rely on secondary sources, such as mainstream newspapers, that have written about the divorce. If they have not written about it, nor should Misplaced Pages.

Notability

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Notability

A subject merits its own article on Misplaced Pages when it is notable enough to have received acknowledgment in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. If an article lacks secondary sources that reasonably demonstrate its importance, it may be listed for deletion.

Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources

In the sciences

Peer-reviewed literature

When evaluating sources of scientific material, sources that were evaluated by someone other than the scientist / author when they were published are the most reliable. This includes peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals. The general rule is to always consider the source. The critical element in evaluating the source of material that is to be included in Misplaced Pages was previously published in a source that reviewed that information. Journal articles that have passed through the peer-review process are thus the most highly reliable sources of scientific information.

Peer-reviewed literature is reliable as a source for propositions, ideas, observations, and other scientific data. However, care must be taken that multiple propositions, ideas, observations, and other data are not stitched together to form a new proposition or idea. The sum total of a piece of writing in Misplaced Pages should not advance a unique or novel interpretation. This is original research, even if each individual component is sourced to highly reliable peer-reviewed literature; original research may not be published in Misplaced Pages.

Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other non-peer-reviewed sources

Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and textbooks that distill peer-reviewed literature and scientific findings into lay-person language may be easier to understand for the non-expert. If available, they must be used carefully as they are further interpretations of the original work. This sort of coverage is not available for all scientific topics, and is not required to establish reliability of a scientific proposition. Lay-person language interpretations, if confusing or inaccurate, should be buttressed by reference to the original material. In a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

Scientific findings that are originally presented in non-peer reviewed literature must be used with particular care, as they have not been reviewed for scientific accuracy. For example, a newspaper may run an article on a scientist and her latest work, or a scientist might maintain a blog about his research. The descriptions of the scientist's previously unpublished findings, as published in the newspaper or on the blog, are not as reliable a description of that research as a peer-reviewed journal article. If it is important to discuss such findings in the Misplaced Pages article, the most reliable source available should be used. If a peer-reviewed article is published after a newspaper, blog, or other non-peer-reviewed publication of the research, both may be used, but in a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

Review articles

Review articles are articles published within scientific journals that survey and synthesize the state of research in a particular area. Review articles can be very helpful in understanding a topic, and on-point review articles should be cited or included as "further research". Review articles, like encyclopedias or textbooks, may also be useful to cite for general propositions about a field. However, there are three issues to consider when using review articles. First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research. If possible, the summarized later research should be reviewed and cited directly when describing any points from that research; however, it is permissible to reference the review article as citing the earlier material. Third, a review article that advances new information or its own new synthesis may be cited for those propositions, just as any publication may. However, the source should be carefully evaluated because review articles may not be peer reviewed

See also

References

  1. Stebbins, Leslie Foster. Student Guide to Research in the Digital Age. Libraries Unlimited, 2006, pp. 61–79. ISBN 1591580994
  2. Thomas, Susan (2007), Research Help:Primary vs. Secondary Sources, New York: Borough of Manhattan Commmunity College, A. Philip Randolph Memorial Library notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".
  3. The National History Day website states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."
  4. ^ Turabian, Kate L; Booth, Wayne C.; Colomb, Gregory G.; Williams, Joseph M. (2007), A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, Chicago: UC Press, pp. 25–27, ISBN 0-226-82337-7
  5. An article from an old newspaper is regarded as primary-source material for an historian looking back at that period, because it's an example of writing that stems directly from the timeframe and the society he's studying. However, a recent newspaper report of, for example, a car accident is a secondary source regarding that accident, unless the reporter was personally involved or an eye witness.
Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
Categories: