Steve Block wrote:
Bogdan Giusca wrote:
Maybe I spent too much time editing history
articles, where the source
credibility matters, but accepting blog/forum/usenet posts as valid
sources would be a great mistake, IMO.
Go tell it to the Oxford English Dictionary
then.
As far as I'm aware, the OED cites such sources as examples of words in
use. In effect the OED is saying "this word was used in this document on
this date", and citing the document itself to show this. This is not the
same thing as providing a citation for a factual claim made in an article.
Isn't that the very definition of a primary source. Something we seem
loathe to allow. We can't state that "these words were used in this
document on this date". We can't state that this thing existed at this
web address on this date. Sorry, but this is the same thing as
providing a citation for a factual claim made in an article. The OED
make the claim of a specific usage or first usage, and use web sources
to provide the citation.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.5/616 - Release Date: 04/01/07 13:34