Anthony DiPierro wrote:
The first half of your post answered my questions. I haven't decided if I agree yet :), but it does make sense.
On 5/2/06, Steve Block steve.block@myrealbox.com wrote:
But as I pointed out when the comment was first made, it's not clear whether or not the four-way stop on that intersection is verifiable without resorting to original research. It might be, and it might not be. It would, of course, be the job of the person adding the information to show that it is.
But what, in this instance, is original research? Is sourcing from public archives original research? Is reading a book original research? Is looking at a map original research?
Steve block
The way I see original research is basically any text which can't be derived trivially from a published source. That's my understanding, without looking at any Wikipedia pages.
Now I suppose "derived trivially" is subject to some dispute there. I like the way Steve Bennett explained this, though I think we have to allow interpretation (including context) to the extent that no one would reasonably dispute the interpretation.
And that's another factor that has to be kept in mind. NOR is, more than anything, a fallback for when there is a disagreement. If no one (who isn't banned, anyway) has a problem with the text as its written, then NOR can safely be ignored. NOR comes into place when someone, (anyone acting in good faith), reads a statement in a Wikipedia article, then reads the source or sources, and isn't *convinced* that the statement is true.
To answer your questions... The main source of original research in the four-way-stop case would be direct observation.
See I agree, but I take that to mean that looking at a website is also original research.
Sourcing from public archives wouldn't be original research as far as I'm concerned.
However, there is a line of argument that me going to the public records office to look up someone's date of birth is original research, since I can't verify that the certificate I get is for the person I claim it to be for. SO sourcing from public archives is a contentious area.
Steve block