Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:23, 6 January 2008

This is an essay. 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 ] WP:EVALUATE

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 several methods for the evaluation of sources. 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 time, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years hence.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary 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.

• 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

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

Examples by field

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

SWOT analysis on primary, secondary and tertiary sources

Comparing advantages and disadvantages of primary, secondary and tertiary sources can not be done in a one-dimensional way. One type of source is not by definition worse or better than another type. It depends on context, what you're trying to use the source for, sound editorial judgement etc.

There are techniques with which to compare advantages and disadvantages in a multi-dimensional way, that provide an easy to follow overview. The model used here is borrowed from business planning, SWOT analysis. Each type of source has its specific advantages and disadvantages, the idea is to exploit Strengths and Opportunities to the maximum, avoiding Weaknesses and Threats. The analyses below highlight only major directions.

Even non-for-profit organisations like Misplaced Pages are businesses for which a SWOT analysis makes sense. The general objective is to improve Misplaced Pages. The SWOT analyses below are however "product placement" SWOTS, not analyses of the organisation as a whole. The finite business objective for which these SWOT analyses are presented below is to provide proper sourcing for all articles, which is a subset of the general goal of improving the encyclopedia by implementing core content policies like WP:V. Three "products" are presented to the "customers" (= Misplaced Pages editors) concurrently in order to reach that business goal. Below are reasons for which to choose source types depending on circumstances.

Primary sources

Strengths

Low risk of deformation of what the original source actually says.

Weaknesses

Relatively narrow scope of the source.

Primary sources are not a good instrument to establish Notability

Opportunities

Primary sources, which are often illustrations, poignant quotes or music/video, may improve attractiveness and insight greatly, and are for that reason widely appreciated.

Threats

Regarding media, the best primary source material is often unavailable for Misplaced Pages through copyright, and can for that reason be sumarily removed. Lots of Wikipedians have gotten discouraged over this.

An overdose of primary sources makes a poor encyclopedia article (otherwise Wikimedia Commons would be regarded as an encyclopedia).

Primary sources are disliked by many editors for their susceptibility to misinterpretation.

Secondary sources

Strengths

Secondary sources likely combine different angles of approach to a subject.

Weaknesses

Secondary sources may contain POVs (from their authors or publishers) that are difficult to detect.

Opportunities

Misplaced Pages's bread-and-butter: sourcing by secondary sources is rarely rejected.

Threats

Involves a lot of tediousness fighting with implementation of footnote code or academic Harvard references

Tertiary sources

Strengths

More likely to be balanced from the outset.

Weaknesses

By the time information reaches a traditional tertiary source, it can easily be outdated.

Opportunities

1911 Britannica and similar tertiary sources without copyright impediments make the base of thousands of Misplaced Pages articles.

Threats

Who cares about antiquated views?

Evaluation per content policies and guidelines

Original research and 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

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

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

• Misplaced Pages:Sources - SWOT analysis
• WP:LIBRARY
• Misplaced Pages:Reference Desk

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 {{citation}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help) 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.; 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 essays