On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Jimmy Wales wrote:
"In
2002 the owners of the Mega Society, a high IQ society, filed suit
against Langan and his wife, Gina LoSasso, for unauthorized use of the
society's trademarks and trade names.[29][30][31]"
This is original research?
Yes. To my knowledge, this has never been written up
in any newspaper,
magazine, or book. It was discovered by reading websites that I think
we would all agree are not themselves reliable sources and by
referencing official court documents. The case, what happened in it,
the outcome, are all matters of interpretation involving original
research
I do not agree that stating that A sued B, when you have a court document
stating that A sued B, is a "matter of interpretation involving original
research." In fact, I find this to be quite strange.
You can argue that it's a notability problem if the only source is the court
document, but poor notability is not original research.
Poor notability is a form of original research. The core of the OR
concept is a Wikipedian writing up his own ideas; or putting two and
two together based on primary sources he's gathered together himself;
or seeking to highlight incidents that no secondary source has thought
to highlight. The point is: when in doubt, find a good secondary
source.
Sarah