Sorry but historical research is a bit more complex. Primary sources need
to be interpreted. For instance, until late XVIII most of records dealt
with "firesides" meaning "nuclear family" corresponding to a different
population according to time and place.

Some trivial information may be referenced with primary sources but most
cannot at all: forbidding original research is one of the pillars of
Wikipedia. You can allow them, but you'll obtain something which no longer
is Wikipedia.

Vito

2018-05-12 14:27 GMT+02:00 Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>:

> A parish book, with all records signed by the priest (and witnesses), and
> reviewed by the Diocesis, is a primary source, and immensely more reliable
> than any secondary sources quoting it.
>
> As we say in Portugal, who tells a story adds something. I'm pretty much
> sure there is a similar saying in English as well.
>
> There is not any reason that I can foresee why a secondary source should be
> used instead of a primary source in those situations.
>
> Paulo
>
> 2018-05-12 6:49 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:
>
> > Maybe there is, but maybe they are in fact conceptually similar, and have
> > similar problems. You will have to clarify:
> > In what way are primary sources "as in history" more reliable and
> > verifiable?
> > Also, how does "as in history" distinguish them from other primary
> sources
> > produced by the subject?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:25 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> >
> > Isn't there an endemic confusion in the Wikipedias between what are
> primary
> > sources (produced by the subject) and primary sources (original sources,
> as
> > in History)? While the first should be avoided at all costs, the second
> > should be preferred over secondary sources most of the time, as they
> > generally are more reliable and verifiable. I keep seeing this confusion
> in
> > Wikipedias, all the time, with disastrous results on the quality of the
> > articles.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> > 2018-05-11 5:49 GMT+01:00 Cameron <came...@cameron11598.net>:
> >
> > > Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and
> > traditions
> > > come to mind. However I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an
> > > encyclopedia using such sources.
> > >
> > > Now as an aspiring historian (Only one semester left on my degree), I
> use
> > > primary sources quite often for papers, and projects however those are
> > > generally frowned upon for Wikipedia; mainly because Wikipedia is an
> > > encyclopedia not an academic journal. Good encyclopedias are typically
> > > sourced from secondary sources, and ocassionaly tertiary sources.
> > >
> > > Now compiling a repository of such orally transmitted histories and
> > > traditions would be an amazing idea for a new project in my opinion. My
> > > personal thought on this issue is keeping our current verifiability and
> > > notability requirements is a good idea. In some areas I think we
> include
> > > far too much (fan cruft anyone?).
> > >
> > > - Cameron C.
> > > Cameron11598
> > >
> > > ---- On Thu, 10 May 2018 21:34:15 -0700 peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> > > wrote ----
> > >
> > > If not written, how would they be referenced and verified?
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 6:28 AM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > > You are missing the whole point. I'm not talking about second guessing
> > > sources but rather changing our narrow point of views of what we
> consider
> > > sources of knowledge. A lot of cultures are of oral tradition and not
> > > written.
> > >
> > > JP
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 10, 2018, 16:42 Todd Allen, <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Abandoning notability and verifiability is a wide open sign for
> > spammers
> > > > and hoaxers. We have enough of that without giving them an engraved
> > > > invitation.
> > > >
> > > > If published sources are biased, the efforts to correct that should
> be
> > > made
> > > > at the source (literally) level. Just like rather than "disputing" a
> > > > reliable source, if we found evidence that contradicts them, we'd ask
> > > them
> > > > to correct, and then once they do we'll update the article
> accordingly
> > > > based on their correction. Wikipedia is not there to second-guess
> what
> > > > sources choose to publish or find "alternative" or "non-western" or
> > > > whatever else have you types of information. If our references are
> > > flawed,
> > > > the solution lies in getting them to correct what they're doing, not
> > > > "correcting" for any perceived bias by editors. We reflect sources,
> we
> > do
> > > > not second-guess, dispute, or correct them.
> > > >
> > > > Todd
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Peter Southwood <
> > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > When Wikipedia was new and unknown there were not so many people
> > > wanting
> > > > > to use it for purposes that conflict with our purposes. Times
> change.
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> > On
> > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:30 PM
> > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > >
> > > > > If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have
> started
> > > > > Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone
> > > > without
> > > > > any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed
> to
> > > > fail.
> > > > > Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is
> not
> > > to
> > > > > remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change
> those
> > > > > requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing
> > > > knowledge. I
> > > > > think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are
> ready
> > > to
> > > > do
> > > > > that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of
> Wikipedia
> > > > when
> > > > > we opened editing to anybody.
> > > > >
> > > > > JP
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
> > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in
> spite
> > of
> > > > > > notability and verifiability requirements, Without the
> > verifiability
> > > > > > requirement it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith are
> > > > things
> > > > > > that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer
> > > evidence,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is
> > > intangible,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means
> > track
> > > > > > record and proof of identity.
> > > > > > This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see
> > it
> > > as
> > > > > > possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a
> > > > reliable
> > > > > > source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without
> destroying
> > > the
> > > > > > credibility we have.
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Peter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Gnangarra
> > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
> > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > >
> > > > > > notability and verifiability are important, every culture and
> > > > language
> > > > > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge. These culture
> > > > manage
> > > > > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the
> > western
> > > > > styles
> > > > > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives. The issue
> is
> > > how
> > > > > do
> > > > > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect
> > > them,
> > > > > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > > > the only.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our
> > current
> > > > > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the
> citations
> > > > from
> > > > > > books published but no digital. Changing the way we consider and
> > > value
> > > > > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the
> > question
> > > > is
> > > > > do
> > > > > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the
> > sum
> > > of
> > > > > all
> > > > > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current
> > > knowledge
> > > > > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the
> > wikipedia
> > > > but
> > > > > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these
> alternative
> > > > > > knowledge streams
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias
> where
> > a
> > > > > member
> > > > > > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity
> though:
> > > > > > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > > > > > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and
> as a
> > > > > > movement
> > > > > > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> > > > > > personally
> > > > > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > > > > > impressions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > > > > escribió:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
> > > > produce
> > > > > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints
> > > opens
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to
> > remain
> > > > > open
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust
> > > alternatives.
> > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then
> probably
> > > not
> > > > be
> > > > > > > open
> > > > > > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> > > lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > > > On
> > > > > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing
> problems
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the
> > canon
> > > of
> > > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge"
> as
> > > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to
> that
> > > > > saying
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be
> > notable
> > > > > > enough,
> > > > > > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their
> canon
> > > of
> > > > > > > > knowledge.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > JP
> > > > > > > > User:Amqui
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <
> > > > fredb...@fairpoint.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.
> org>
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing
> > problems
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly,
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will
> > > never
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > to correct it."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the
> > canon
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The knowledge industry could do better. And when it does,
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > reflect that. in the meantime it is helpful if gender and
> > other
> > > > > bias
> > > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > are noted and accommodated. Our mission is more modest than
> > > full
> > > > > > > > correction
> > > > > > > > > of all bias, but we can contribute or even lead.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Fred
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> and
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> > > > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > > > > > > > http://www.avg.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > GN.
> > > > > > Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.
> > org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> > > > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > > > > > Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), *Never
> Again:
> > > > > > Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8*, UWAP,
> > 2017.
> > > > > > Order
> > > > > > here
> > > > > > <
> > > > > > https://uwap.uwa.edu.au/products/never-again-
> > > > > reflections-on-environmental-responsibility-after-roe-8
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to