Thank you Tom, and Sarah, for your very helpful explanations - they are
extremely useful.
There's a discussion on at the reliable sources notice board, for
instance, which highlights some of the interpretive problems you raise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Oral_Citations
Can I ask you how you would analyse the work of the oral citations
project (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Oral_Citations) in
terms of our policies on original research, and verifiability?
And further, how these policies might apply to the idea of social media,
as well as more private archives, say, corporate archives, being used as
citations? (And on that point, is there a difference between the the
Native American folk archive at the Smithsonian and the corporate
archives of the Michelin corporation in France, for our purposes?)
Okay, I know that's asking a lot :)
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 08:56 PM, Sarah wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Achal Prabhala<aprabh...@gmail.com> wrote:
An aside: there are millions of oral testimonies hosted at thousands of
extremely reputable organisations - on Native American life at the
Smithsonian, or Holocaust history at Yale - which currently have no place on
Wikipedia, because they're primary sources.
There is no policy disallowing the use of primary sources on the
English Wikipedia. They have to be used carefully, because it's easy
to misuse them, but they're definitely allowed. See the NOR policy --
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:No_original_research&oldid=478167288#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources
Sarah
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
