85:
24:
98:
Even non-for-profit organisations like
Knowledge are businesses for which a SWOT analysis makes sense. The general objective is to improve Knowledge. The SWOT analyses below are however "product placement" SWOTS, not analyses of the organisation as a whole. The finite business objective for which
80:
Comparing advantages and disadvantages of primary, secondary and tertiary sources cannot be done in a one-dimensional way. One type of source is not by definition worse or better than another type. It depends on context, what you're trying to use the source for, sound editorial judgement etc.
95:. Each type of source has its specific advantages and disadvantages, the idea is to exploit Strengths and Opportunities to the maximum, avoiding Weaknesses and Threats. The analyses below highlight only major directions.
139:
Regarding media, the best primary source material is often unavailable for
Knowledge through copyright, and can for that reason be summarily removed. Lots of Wikipedians have gotten discouraged over this.
103:. Three "products" are presented to the "customers" (= Knowledge editors) concurrently in order to reach that business goal. Below are reasons for which to choose source types depending on circumstances.
99:
these SWOT analyses are presented below is to provide proper sourcing for all articles, which is a subset of the general goal of improving the encyclopedia by implementing core content policies like
91:
There are techniques with which to compare advantages and disadvantages in a multi-dimensional way, that provide an easy to follow overview. The model used here is borrowed from business planning,
133:
Primary sources, which are often illustrations, poignant quotes or music/video, may improve attractiveness and insight greatly, and are for that reason widely appreciated.
248:
243:
39:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
40:
189:
238:
219:
and similar tertiary sources without copyright impediments make the base of thousands of
Knowledge articles.
225:
More likely to be so far from the facts that there is a risk of importing bias and oversimplification
185:
172:
Secondary sources may contain POVs (from their authors or publishers) that are difficult to detect.
44:
54:
149:
Primary sources are disliked by many editors for their susceptibility to misinterpretation and
143:
32:
210:
By the time information reaches a traditional tertiary source, it can easily be outdated.
150:
232:
92:
47:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
125:
100:
178:
Knowledge's bread-and-butter: sourcing by secondary sources is rarely rejected.
142:
An overdose of primary sources makes a poor encyclopedia article (otherwise
166:
Secondary sources likely combine different angles of approach to a subject.
84:
115:
Low risk of deformation of what the original source actually says.
83:
184:
Involves a lot of tediousness fighting with implementation of
18:
76:
SWOT analysis on primary, secondary and tertiary sources
216:
124:
Primary sources are not a good instrument to establish
62:
8:
204:More likely to be balanced from the outset.
249:Knowledge essays about reliable sources
146:would be regarded as an encyclopedia).
121:Relatively narrow scope of the source.
7:
244:Knowledge essays about verification
45:thoroughly vetted by the community
41:Knowledge's policies or guidelines
14:
22:
1:
265:
52:
16:Essay on editing Knowledge
88:
87:
43:, as it has not been
190:Harvard references
89:
188:code or academic
158:Secondary sources
144:Wikimedia Commons
73:
72:
256:
239:Knowledge essays
196:Tertiary sources
65:
26:
25:
19:
264:
263:
259:
258:
257:
255:
254:
253:
229:
228:
217:1911 Britannica
198:
160:
109:
107:Primary sources
78:
69:
68:
61:
57:
49:
48:
23:
17:
12:
11:
5:
262:
260:
252:
251:
246:
241:
231:
230:
227:
226:
223:
220:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
197:
194:
193:
192:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
159:
156:
155:
154:
151:selection bias
147:
140:
137:
134:
131:
128:
122:
119:
116:
113:
108:
105:
77:
74:
71:
70:
67:
66:
58:
53:
50:
38:
37:
29:
27:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
261:
250:
247:
245:
242:
240:
237:
236:
234:
224:
221:
218:
215:
213:Opportunities
212:
209:
206:
203:
200:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
180:
177:
175:Opportunities
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
161:
157:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
135:
132:
130:Opportunities
129:
127:
123:
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
106:
104:
102:
96:
94:
93:SWOT analysis
86:
82:
75:
64:
60:
59:
56:
51:
46:
42:
36:
34:
28:
21:
20:
97:
90:
79:
30:
31:This is an
233:Categories
207:Weaknesses
169:Weaknesses
126:Notability
118:Weaknesses
201:Strengths
163:Strengths
112:Strengths
186:footnote
63:WP:SWOT
55:Shortcut
222:Threats
181:Threats
136:Threats
33:essay
101:WP:V
235::
153:.
35:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
