In a message dated 1/2/2009 2:51:07 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, arromdee@rahul.net writes:
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
But, we do not *want* primary sources to be summarized unless they have already been commented upon in secondary sources.
"Summarizing" isn't the same thing as "commented on", so this is a non-sequitur.>> -------------------- I'm not saying they are the same. I'm saying that first a secondary source must remark upon, refer to, quote from, comment upon, a primary source or it's information *in some fashion* (not necessarily summarizing it), *before* we wish to also do the same.
If no one mentions where Barack Obama lived his childhood, then we cannot use school records to show it either. If someone cites a secondary source showing that he lived in Michigan, then we can cite a primary source showing that he didn't.
That's the point I was making.
Will Johnson
**************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)