Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Wikipedia'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 Wikipedia:No original research, and Wikipedia:Verifiability. If there are inconsistencies between ...
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.
The age of a source affects its relevance and usefulness in research. In fast-changing areas, recent publications are important for the latest findings. Older sources may provide foundational knowledge or history, but one must consider their date. Understanding the context of both new and old sources is essential for clarity.
The CRAAP test is a test to check the objective reliability of information sources across academic disciplines. CRAAP is an acronym for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. [1] Due to a vast number of sources existing online, it can be difficult to tell whether these sources are trustworthy to use as tools for research.
A source is where the material comes from. For example, a source could be a book or a webpage. A source can be reliable or unreliable for the material it is meant to support. Some sources, such as unpublished texts and an editor's own personal experience, are prohibited.
The medium is not the message; source evaluation is an evaluation of content, not publication format. Sometimes high-quality, generally tertiary individual sources are also primary or secondary sources for some material. Two examples are etymological research that is the original work of a dictionary's staff (primary); and analytical not just regurgitative material in a topical encycl
Secondary sources are at least one step removed from an event. They rely for their material on primary sources, often making analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims. [4] [5] [6] Secondary sources include books, newspaper reports, reviews of films etc. and many academic papers, although this always depends on the ...
This page in a nutshell: Cite reviews, don't write them. Appropriate sources for discussing the natural sciences include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as recent peer reviewed articles in reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies, widely recognized standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or standard ...