Template:Tertiary source: Difference between revisions
Sources>Danbloch Undid revision 1214621999 by Madansouthkorean23 (talk); rvv |
Sources>Solilunar |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==Wikipedia== | ==Wikipedia== | ||
[[Wikipedia]] is a tertiary source.<ref>{{cite web |title=Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Sources |url=https://crk.umn.edu/library/primary-secondary-and-tertiary-sources |website=University of Minnesota Crookston |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Because Wikipedia is easily editable by anyone, it is generally not considered to be a reliable source for academic citation.<ref>{{cite web |title="Is Wikipedia a reliable source?" |url=https://libraries.blogs.delaware.gov/2013/05/05/is-wikipedia-a-reliable-source/ |website=Delaware.gov |date=5 May 2013 |publisher=Delaware Division of Libraries |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Nevertheless, content on Wikipedia is generally accurate.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Mannix |first1=Liam |title=Evidence suggests Wikipedia is accurate and reliable. When are we going to start taking it seriously? |url=https://www.smh.com.au/national/evidence-suggests-wikipedia-is-accurate-and-reliable-when-are-we-going-to-start-taking-it-seriously-20220913-p5bhl3.html |website=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=13 September 2022 |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Wikipedia often proves useful for finding primary and secondary sources.<ref>See [[Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia]] for more information.</ref> | [[Wikipedia]] is a tertiary source.<ref>{{cite web |title=Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Sources |url=https://crk.umn.edu/library/primary-secondary-and-tertiary-sources |website=University of Minnesota Crookston |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Because Wikipedia is easily editable by anyone, it is generally ''not'' considered to be [[Reliability of Wikipedia|a reliable source for academic citation]].<ref>{{cite web |title="Is Wikipedia a reliable source?" |url=https://libraries.blogs.delaware.gov/2013/05/05/is-wikipedia-a-reliable-source/ |website=Delaware.gov |date=5 May 2013 |publisher=Delaware Division of Libraries |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Nevertheless, content on Wikipedia is generally accurate.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Mannix |first1=Liam |title=Evidence suggests Wikipedia is accurate and reliable. When are we going to start taking it seriously? |url=https://www.smh.com.au/national/evidence-suggests-wikipedia-is-accurate-and-reliable-when-are-we-going-to-start-taking-it-seriously-20220913-p5bhl3.html |website=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=13 September 2022 |access-date=19 April 2023}}</ref> Wikipedia often proves useful for finding primary and secondary sources.<ref>See [[Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia]] for more information.</ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 18:45, 3 April 2024
Template:Short description Template:Distinguish Template:Self reference A tertiary source is an index or textual consolidation of already published primary and secondary sources[1] that does not provide additional interpretations or analysis of the sources.[2][3] Some tertiary sources can be used as an aid to find key (seminal) sources, key terms, general common knowledge[4] and established mainstream science on a topic. The exact definition of tertiary varies by academic field.
Academic research standards generally do not accept tertiary sources such as encyclopedias as citations,[4] although survey articles are frequently cited rather than the original publication.
Overlap with secondary sources
Depending on the topic of research, a scholar may use a bibliography, dictionary, or encyclopedia as either a tertiary or a secondary source.[1] This causes some difficulty in defining many sources as either one type or the other.
In some academic disciplines, the differentiation between a secondary and tertiary source is relative.[1][3]
In the United Nations International Scientific Information System (UNISIST) model, a secondary source is a bibliography, whereas a tertiary source is a synthesis of primary sources.[5]
Types of tertiary sources
Template:More citations needed As tertiary sources, encyclopedias, dictionaries, some textbooks,[1] and compendia attempt to summarize, collect, and consolidate the source materials into an overview without adding analysis and synthesis of new conclusions.
Indexes, bibliographies, concordances, and databases are aggregates of primary and secondary sources and therefore often considered tertiary sources. They may also serve as a point of access to the full or partial text of primary and secondary sources. Almanacs, travel guides, field guides, and timelines are also examples of tertiary sources.
Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a tertiary source.[6] Because Wikipedia is easily editable by anyone, it is generally not considered to be a reliable source for academic citation.[7] Nevertheless, content on Wikipedia is generally accurate.[8] Wikipedia often proves useful for finding primary and secondary sources.[9]
See also
References
Template:Historiography Template:Libraries and library science
de:Sekundärliteratur#Tertiärliteratur
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Primary, secondary and tertiary sources. Template:Webarchive". University Libraries, University of Maryland. Retrieve 07/26/2013
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 "Tertiary sources Template:Webarchive". James Cook University.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 "Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Resources". University of New Haven.
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ See Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia for more information.