JAY JG wrote
Perhaps the [[Wikipedia:No original research]] page needs to be updated
with
examples which make that point that if it really is that simple, someone else will have done the work for you already, and all you need to do is quote them.
Literally speaking, conversion of temperatures from Fahrenheit to Celsius would fall foul of this. And numerous other things: such as conversion of dates out of one calendar system into another, metrication, currency conversion, inverting family relationships from 'nephew' to 'uncle' ...
It is far from obvious that _every instance_ of every such low-level operation can be supported as a literal quote. I don't expect this to have much effect on editors. But surely drawing up such a policy that is drafted in too sweeping a way is going to inhibit something valuable, sometime, somewhere.
There was an argument brought forward on the Featured Article status discussion for [[The Cantos]], that everything said about the interpretation for this poem should be drawn from the secondary literature. Now, the argument had some merit: the article was amended in specific ways. But considering that the article itself summarised (expertly, and that part was nothing to do with me) all 107-odd cantos of this 500 page poem, there was also a slightly ridiculous quality to arguing that you couldn't just provide a helpful summary of themes extracted from all that, to help the reader get into 80K of text.
And I honestly think the article might never have got started at all, if NOR had clouded my judgement about getting some scaffolding in place.
Charles