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(a)gmail.com>om>:
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