Regarding no original research - most if not all Wikipedias probably started out including a fair bit of original research in the shape of things people compile from what they think they know. When I first added content to Wikipedia articles in 2003, nobody asked me for a source. My memory comes up with some kind of slogan "write what you know and what you are willing to learn", or similar... as the community on a specific project matures, and as the content of the Wikipedia expands, there comes the state where it gets important to add sources. If enwiki had required everything added needed a source, straight from the start, I wonder where enwiki would be today. A lot smaller, probably.
I agree with both Berto and Erik that it would be very good to have some definition of what a Wikipedia has to be, and has to follow, written down. OTOH then there is the danger that some people might assume that everything _not_ written on that page is explicitly allowed... so it probably has to be done with some care. Rules not written down works if people do have good faith and a common goal - not otherwise.
2007/2/27, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
So, an online community with no real rules. You must be kidding guys.
An online community where "Ignore all rules" is policy, you mean. ;-)
/habj