2009/8/23 Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:15 PM, <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote: >> The way it was discussed in-project a teritiary source summarizes >> several secondary sources into one cohesive article. > > Is a work that summarises/draws on multiple news articles secondary or > tertiary? I wonder, because I've considered writing articles based on > very old newspaper articles (eg, late 1800s). But I realise that it's > actually pretty hard to do, to not take events out of context, etc. > I'd be much better off using a book written by a historian...who has > read the articles. Is that book secondary? Tertiary? Somewhere in > between?
In this context, I think it's safe to say that the contemporary news articles are primary sources; the book by the historian is a secondary source; we're synthesising that and some other materials to be a tertiary source. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
