[WikiEN-l] Re: Original research

[Michael Snow]

David Gerard wrote:

>(I have had to consider this problem with wanting to write about Australian
>'80s indie rock. Trouble is, I'm one of the authoritative sources. Do I
>just not write about the stuff I'm the specialist in? Do I write about it
>and link to interviews I wrote and published? Should I just put a list of
>possible articles and the source I would list as reference and leave others
>to maybe write the articles?
>
I see no problem with published experts writing about their field of 
expertise on Wikipedia. It's the sort of thing we should very much 
encourage to boost our credibility. They can't use Wikipedia to present 
and advance new material that hasn't seen the light of day yet - that 
would be original research. But if they rewrite their own information 
that has been published elsewhere, that would be fine. It's no different 
from what anyone else can do using the same information, but the expert 
is particularly well qualified to do so.

The critical thing is that the expert *can and should* cite their own 
credible material that has already been published elsewhere. This makes 
it verifiable and is a check against original research. In academia, it 
might be bad form to cite yourself as a source unnecessarily, or as the 
primary evidence for a disputed proposition. But self-citation also 
happens legitimately, particularly in under-researched fields where the 
available source literature is meager. Also, if some of the work is 
effectively primary rather than secondary source material (oral history 
being such an example), it could be positively poor scholarship *not* to 
cite yourself in such cases.

In this sense the problem is somewhat different from the issue that 
occasionally arises when people contribute to articles about themselves 
or organizations they participate in. The concern there, I think, is 
more about the appearance of impropriety and potential to slant the 
content in violation of NPOV. The scenarios do have one thing in common, 
though, which is that it can be challenging to distinguish between one's 
personal knowledge of the subject and the knowledge that has actually 
been disseminated to the public already.

--Michael Snow