User talk:Slrubenstein/NOR

Rely

One question I have is mainly to clear up what we mean by 'rely'. When we say an article relies on primary sources, does that mean it includes a single cited reference or that a majority of the article is built upon primary sources? I would think the latter, but apparently, some on the main talk page for NOR see it otherwise...that rely means any single usage. I may be misunderstanding the situation, tho... Dreadstar † 20:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I like "employ". Nice! Dreadstar † 21:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Reversion

Please feel free to revert any edits I make to the article...;) I can make my recommendations here instead. Dreadstar † 20:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Ditto :) ... dave souza, talk 10:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Primary and secondary source use

Is it clear enough that an editor is prohibited from juxtaposing a conflicting primary source with the secondary source it's opposing? I've seen a lot of comments by editors claiming that they “just” listed the conflicting information in a article without making an analysis; when in fact the mere inclusion of such content is clearly meant as an unpublished analysis, that one source is incorrect. Or is this stretching NOR beyond its bounds? It looks like slippery slope to me...leading to more unpublished analysis and synthesis of sources.

Secondary sources should be the main supporting citations, is that made clearly enough? That’s why I support the inclusion of the two sentences, or at least the concept they embody - it doesn’t have to be those specific words.

• Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources.
• Although most articles should rely predominantly on secondary sources, there are rare occasions when they may rely on primary sources.

And what I think it means by ‘rely’ is that a majority of all article content should be based on secondary sources. I don’t know if ‘rely’ is actually the best word for that, since ‘rely’ can be used to describe sourcing for a single sentence with a single reference out of many.

We can clearly use primary sources, but the primary basis of all Wikipedia articles should hinge, or be established on secondary rather than primary.

Or is that already made clear in the draft? Dreadstar † 22:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)