• waldenA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    13 days ago

    Does every bit of info have a published source?

    What sort of requirements does Wikipedia have for published info, I wonder. There’s a lot of wrong info published in books and online.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 days ago

      It’s an encyclopedia. That makes it a tertiary source. Just as a secondary source (book, journalism, and so on) should cite its primary sources, a tertiary source should cite its secondary sources. Yes, you should be able to source the origin of every assertion of fact.

      • waldenA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Fair enough.

        Does Wikipedia allow someone to tag themselves as a primary source, or does it have to be published elsewhere first?

        Like if someone had specific firsthand knowledge that Elvis preferred a certain brand of Peanut Butter, but that tidbit isn’t published anywhere, how would that work?

        Sorry for not researching this stuff on my own, I’m just curious, but not curious enough to go figure it out on my own.

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          13 days ago

          Very easy to answer that: no. This falls under the “No original research” rule. The information must be publicly available from a reputable source. If you had insider info about Elvis’s peanut butter you would need to write it up and get your article accepted by a recognized publication, basically.

          • waldenA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            13 days ago

            That’s really interesting, thanks.