Dear Ray Saintonge,
Not one bit of those articles constitutes "original research". It is 100%
cited to highly reliable third party sources. They are exact summaries of
thousands of pages of source material. Furthermore, Simple English is about
the use of simple language to convey encyclopedic content, not simple
"material" and stop at anything more complex. We provide material for those
who lack advanced English language skills, but this does not mean they lack
mental faculties. As I said, its language has not yet been simplified, as
that is the end of the process before it is put into mainspace there.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Peters
aka Ottava Rima
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:27 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
After taking a quick look at the incomprehensible and
opaque dispute
that took place, I do agree that adding this material to Simple seems to
be an act of self-preservation. The kind of detailed scholarship in
them does not accord with my own vision of Simple. While articles on key
tidbits of English literature deserve a place in Simple, one must ever
be mindful that the potential audience has an even more limited
apprehension of English literary history than of the English language.
That said, these articles, as worthy as anything that might be found in
PMLA, do have a place somewhere in the wiki family, even if the rules
against original research may not make them suitable for Wikipedia itself.
If we accept as a premise that these articles constitute original
research, what is the best place for them? Good original research is
only too quickly distorted when subject to multiple edits by different
individuals with divergent perspectives until it is refined into the
coherence of a Jehovah's Witness tract.
Perhaps a new project is needed where the integrity of the original
contribution is retained, and future modifications remain the sole right
of the oriuginal contributor. These essays would still be available for
comment criticism and peer review in associated pages. Sj's thread on
citation bias in the medical field struck a chord in me. It makes me
wonder how we might be able to do peer review better than the academic
establishment.
Ec
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l