In my own opinion, peer-review is not sufficient for "surprising" results.
Rather, another layer, that of "having your paper cited by others as a foundation for
their own research"
Or "having others confirm your findings"
At that point, I would think it's acceptable. Too often new surprising results turn
out to be errors.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jennifer Gristock <gristock(a)me.com>
To: Wikimedia Education <education(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thu, Jul 10, 2014 12:15 pm
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Education] Overcoming a roadblock to engagement
Sent from my mobile
On 10 Jul 2014, at 19:57, Wjhonson
<wjhonson(a)aol.com> wrote:
Once those findings have been verified by others in that field, we are in a
different territory of course.
"New surprising findings", self-contributed,
are anathema to encyclopedias.
In other words, Peer review. We're talking about citing published papers. Not
just citing from your own website or anything like that of course!
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education