Ad
related to: source analysis essay
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
WP:Sources – SWOT analysis (essay; a four-criterion comparison of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources) WP:Tertiary-source fallacy (essay; advancing a tertiary source as if it ends all argument is a mistake) WP:You are probably not a lexicologist or a lexicographer (essay: opinions about word usage do not trump reliable sources on language)
Among genealogists, a primary source comes from a direct witness, a secondary source comes from second-hand information or hearsay told to others by witnesses, and tertiary sources can represent either a further link in the chain or an analysis, summary, or distillation of primary and/or secondary sources. In this system, an elderly woman's ...
Sometimes it's clear, based on editorial analysis of a source, that it is wrong, but there is no substitute source that is clearly right. Here it bears mentioning: We do not engage in original primary or secondary research, but we are creators of original tertiary analysis. That is what we do as encyclopedists.
This wall painting found in the Roman city of Pompeii is an example of a primary source about people in Pompeii in Roman times (portrait of Terentius Neo).. In the study of history as an academic discipline, a primary source (also called an original source) is an artifact, document, diary, manuscript, autobiography, recording, or any other source of information that was created at the time ...
Source criticism (or information evaluation) is the process of evaluating an information source, i.e.: a document, a person, a speech, a fingerprint, a photo, an observation, or anything used in order to obtain knowledge. In relation to a given purpose, a given information source may be more or less valid, reliable or relevant.
This is an essay on the Wikipedia:No original research § Primary, secondary and tertiary source policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines , as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community .
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.
A third-party source from one article may be treated as an auxiliary source in another, because the focus has changed. [6] Generally, any source that does not qualify as a reliable third-party source is grouped in this category. The use of these raw, first-hand, or out-of-date sources lends itself to inaccurate reporting, undue weight, and ...