A letter is a primary source.
No, an encyclopedia is a secondary source.
secondary
Bias is not a secondary source. In terms of historical and academic research and writing, secondary sources are articles and books written by historians and other academics. Secondary sources can be biased based on when the source was written and the author.Ê
Primary Source
an example of a secondary source is a history/textbookbook, websites, reviews, encyclopedia, dictionary.annotations or commentaries on primary sources such as cases or legislators.
Original letters or documents, for example. A secondary source would be an essay, for example, about the original source.
A letter is a primary source.
Rainwater is an example of a primary source of water. Water from a pumping station is a secondary source of water.
an example of a secondary source is a history/textbookbook, websites, reviews, encyclopedia, dictionary.annotations or commentaries on primary sources such as cases or legislators.
a textbook is considered as a secondary source. for example, in many social studies textbook it stars or quotes a primary source, it is usually in italic letters.
A Primary Source is something that tells the truth and it was told by people in the event or the one that said it or did it. A Secondary Source is something that doesn't tell the truth and it was written by someone that searched it up online. An example of a primary source is Abraham Lincoln's quotes, my teacher gave me a sheet with a primary source in the front and in the back a secondary source. in the secondary source it said lies about Abraham Lincoln and in the primary source it said exactly what he said.
A secondary source document useful in the study of history could be an autobiography written by someone at the time or a record or statement made by someone who was not an eyewitness to a specific event.
No, an encyclopedia is a secondary source.
a letter is an example of a primary source, in other words, a firsthand account. hope this helps! :)
It depends. If it is your journal, or you are quoting from a journal you have actually seen, then no. A secondary source would be a newspaper report of that journal entry, for example. Unless the journal entry is stating something read or seen elsewhere, then it WOULD be a secondary source.
A primary source is a source that has direct knowledge of the idea. it can be from the person who saw it or the person who did the original research. Primary source is in contrast to secondary source - a source that is quoting or gathering information from primary sources. the terms primary and secondary are relative terms.For example, a research based on other peoples words, can be a secondary source. however, compared to Wikipedia, it would be a primary source.