Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 18:
Line 18: − +
Conservapedia talk:Sources (view source)
Revision as of 19:26, March 29, 2007
, 19:26, March 29, 2007no edit summary
::: Even then, its the issue of a wiki is not a primary source. Should references be restricted to primary sources? Should secondary sources be allowed? Or tertiary sources? If it turns out that Conservapedia uses tertiary sources, then it becomes a quaternary source which is rarely acceptable for any citations being so far removed from the original material. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 15:19, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
::: Even then, its the issue of a wiki is not a primary source. Should references be restricted to primary sources? Should secondary sources be allowed? Or tertiary sources? If it turns out that Conservapedia uses tertiary sources, then it becomes a quaternary source which is rarely acceptable for any citations being so far removed from the original material. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 15:19, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Check the manual of style. "no wikis". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:25, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Check the [[Conservapedia:Manual of Style|manual of style]]. "no wikis". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:25, 29 March 2007 (EDT)