Thank you for the reference to the WP policies which I have read. It appears that the idea of not allowing original research was to prevent crackpot theories that had not received the stamp of approval through publication. However, WP may have narrowed the mouth of the net too much when they indicate that a work needs to be published in order for it to have received peer review (be verifiable). I am thinking again of papers presented to conferences that do not get "published." It seems to me that although these are original research, they would many times still have been vetted through the peer review process to be accepted for a conference. Also, when a CZ "author" puts together an article citing original sources, that might be construed to be "original" work but in truth it is only drawing on verifiable information. To me, it seems that the original goal of the WP policy is two-fold: to eliminate crackpot articles and to post verifiable information for users. If that is so, neither unpublished conference papers nor articles that compile information from original sources would appear to violate that standard, especially within the framework of CZ having expert editors reviewing articles. Susan
At 06:54 AM 10/18/2006 -0600, Fred Bauder wrote:
On Oct 18, 2006, at 6:29 AM, Susan Awbrey wrote:
David and All:
I certainly agree that citing a primary source is not research and
that it should be allowed in articles that claim verifiability and
accuracy. However, I'm not sure why original research has been
banned? First, I ask this because I thought CZ was going to be
different from WP and it looks like we are recreating the same
thing. Second, if the goal truly is to allow as free an
interchange as possible and CZ is going to have expert editors, why
limit what can be posted? Guess if I take the open environment
concept of CZ to heart I would believe that all levels of articles
(from high school through post doctorate) as well as all source
levels of articles should be allowed....Why not, would be my
question...what will it harm and it actually could add to both the
learning and user mix. Susan
Larry wrote most of the policy which guides Wikipedia; however, this
particular policy was initiated by Jimbo, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Wikipedia:No_original_research&oldid=2014449
It was intended to deal with crackpot scientific theories, most of
come not from experts, but actual crackpots. However, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/ Carl_Hewitt for a notable exception.
Fred Bauder
Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education
520 O'Dowd Hall
Oakland University
Rochester, Michigan 48309
Phone: 248-370-2188
Fax: 248-370-2589
_______________________________________________ Citizendium-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
