[WikiEN-l] The 3RR policy should not always be blindly followed

[Charles Matthews]

<slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote

> Tony, [[Wikipedia:Cite sources]] may only be a guideline, but it's
> inextricably linked to [[Wikipedia:No original research]], which is
> policy, because the only way you can show that an edit isn't original
> research is to produce a reputable source.

Doesn't that get back to over-interpreting 'original research'?  Which was
discussed at length here, a while ago.  I distrust statements of this kind,
on principle.  Anyway it is a poor description of what goes on. A one-line
deduction from known facts is obviously not 'original research', whether or
not you can cite someone else having already done it.  Such things are the
small change of doing the research for an article.  (Obviously if I read
that A is the son of B, I deduce that B is the parent of A; put a few such
trivial moves together and you get conclusions which are possibly novel.)

Charles