[Foundation-l] On Wikinews

[Theo10011]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Sarah <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 14:28, Theo10011 <de10011 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I doubt that would be enough to satisfy the no original research
> > requirement. The idea linking back to a Wikimedia project as a source is
> not
> > a new one, it has been tried many times and doesn't work.
>
> The no original research policy was never intended to keep out
> material like this. Its purpose is to stop editors adding their own
> opinions to the text of articles. But we have always had original
> research in the form of images; indeed, we encourage it. We just have
> to be careful that images on a contentious article don't unfairly push
> the reader in a certain direction, but we normally take a very liberal
> view of what that means.
>
> Adding video-taped interviews is the next step. Imagine articles about
> the Second World War containing video interviews by Wikipedians of
> people who lived through certain parts of it. There is no inherent POV
> issue there, so long as we observe NPOV, just as we do with text.
> Primary sources are already allowed, so long as used descriptively and
> not interpreted.
>
> Sarah
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

I had no idea we were so liberal about original research/primary sources
from the countless hours I spent in #wikipedia-en-help telling new users why
their cited references were rejected. Well, now we can finally have those
thousands of articles about cure-alls and diet-pills, and penis-enlargement
exercises, since the manufacturer's own research would satisfy those
standards.

Now I wonder who I can cite for this picture of Bigfoot(allegedly) I found
somewhere.

Theo