On 5/2/06, Steve Bennett stevage@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