On 5/2/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see what's original research about
this.
It's all a matter of definition. Under some definitions, Wikipedia
thrives on original research and could not exist without it. We are
all researchers the moment we decide to pick a topic, study the
sources, evaluate them carefully, weigh expert against expert and make
decisions about what to include and what to omit, how to arrange the
text, which "NPOV" terms to use, and so on.
Our original research policy does not exist without a reason, of
course. It exists so we can prevent material from being added which is
either obviously spurious, or which we have no means to verify.
Essentially, I have always seen it as a useful supplement to
[[Wikipedia:Verifiability]].
When the policy is used to remove legitimate information that is
clearly correct, or to impede the daily work of contributors against
all common sense, it is used against its original purpose and should
be interpreted in that light. Policy is a means to an end, not an end
in itself.
Erik