On 5/2/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com>
I don't see what's original research about
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.
Can someone summarise the case for considering photos of
Wikipedian-identified animals as OR, though?