Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 189: Difference between revisions

m
Bot: Replacements: fix URL prefix
m (Archiving 2 discussion(s) from Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard) (bot)
m (Bot: Replacements: fix URL prefix)
'''What should an editor do if they find that a secondary source is inaccurate in its reporting of a primary source or sources?'''
 
The page for {{cite web |url=http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources |title = reliable sources}} says: "While specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred". Suppose a secondary source (for instance a news story about a court case) is not in agreement with the (primary source) court records? Or for another example, suppose an article in a popular science magazine (a secondary source) does not report a scientific study (primary source) correctly? To give another example, suppose publicly available documents from an estate (primary) exonerate a deceased person, while a biography (a secondary source) accuses them of some unethical mistake?
I propose that this guideline needs clarification, as follows:
 
53,084

edits