Timeline for Mixing primary and secondary references
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 22, 2016 at 1:52 | answer | added | electroducer | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 1:41 | comment | added | Thomas Steinke | Normally you should cite the primary source. The only reason I would prefer to cite a secondary source is if it is more readable than the primary source, in which case I would cite both. | |
| Apr 21, 2016 at 23:30 | comment | added | Luigi | I'd go with 1. Why complicate things? | |
| Apr 21, 2016 at 22:53 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 22, 2016 at 0:05 | |||||
| Apr 21, 2016 at 22:50 | history | asked | Artyom Skrobov | CC BY-SA 3.0 |