[WikiEN-l] Original research or common sense inferral?

[Phil Sandifer]

On Apr 2, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 06:18:49 -0700, "Seraphim Blade"
> <seraphimbladewikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Generally, "being right" is not a defense to NOR. NOR helps to
>> preserve relevance and importance of information as well as
>> correctness of it. If no one else has seen fit to investigate this
>> matter or publish that conclusion, why should we be the first? If the
>> guy's that concerned, tell him to suggest the story to a  
>> newspaper. If
>> the paper decides it's correct and important enough to publish,
>> there's the source!
>
> I completely agree.

I completely disagree.

Straightforward interpretation of primary sources is not original  
research. It never has been, and it needs to remain that way because  
of the number of notable articles about which there are not good or  
usable comprehensive secondary sources.

-Phil