-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
There are presumably objective pieces of information in such reports
that do not require interpretation before they can be used - for example
if an FBI report into a child porn ring stated the X people were
involved in the porn ring, Y number of children were abused, Z million
dollars were involved, then there is surely no original research
involved in using that information in a Wikipedia article about the
child porn ring and citing the FBI report?
Cynical
slimvirgin(a)gmail.com wrote:
On 4/7/06, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Here's a problem: what happens when the
contents of an article can
only be verified by relying on sources which are illegal to view?
Hi Stephen, the article should cite third-party sources about the
contents of the material. If Wikipedians have to look at the material
themselves, that constitutes original research, because it would
involve them relying on their own interpretations of it. If there are
no third-party descriptions, then the material shouldn't be described
in our article about it.
Sarah
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFENouIg8fvtQYQevcRAljeAJwLnZXRBy0iif/pwJDMHwI5bb59HwCff0FS
Lf0axl+IoS4AfaXaCgBySkc=
=I+/P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----