Misplaced Pages

:No original research: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:57, 7 February 2004 view sourceHadal (talk | contribs)Administrators31,685 editsm reguardless > regardless← Previous edit Revision as of 15:03, 13 February 2004 view source Reddi (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users58,350 edits -scientific; -experimental; Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
] the place for original research such as "new" scientific theories. Specific factual content is not the question. ] the place for original research such as "new" theories. Specific factual content is not the question.


From by ]: From by ]:


* If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate with reference to commonly accepted reference texts. * If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate with reference to commonly accepted reference texts.
* If a viewpoint is held by a significant scientific minority, then it should be easy to name "''prominent''" adherents . * If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name "''prominent''" adherents .
* If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Misplaced Pages (except perhaps in some ancilliary article), regardless if ''it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not''. * If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Misplaced Pages (except perhaps in some ancilliary article), regardless if ''it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not''.


For scientific theories: For theories:
# State the valid concepts, # State the valid concepts,
# State the known and popular ideas and identify general scientific "''consensus''", and # State the known and popular ideas and identify general scientific "''consensus''", and
Line 14: Line 14:
The following are NOT grounds for exclusion: The following are NOT grounds for exclusion:


# Listing claims which have little or no supporting experimental evidence; # Listing claims which have little or no supporting evidence;
# Listing claims which contradict experimentally established results; # Listing claims which contradict established conditions, explainations, or soulutions;
# Including research that fails to provide an experimental possibility of reproducible results; or # Including research that fails to provide an possibility of reproducible results; or
# Citing viewpoints that violate Occam's Razor (the principle of choosing the simplest explanation when multiple viable explanations are possible). # Citing viewpoints that violate Occam's Razor (the principle of choosing the simplest explanation when multiple viable explanations are possible).


Revision as of 15:03, 13 February 2004

Misplaced Pages is not the place for original research such as "new" theories. Specific factual content is not the question.

From a mailing list post by Jimbo Wales:

  • If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate with reference to commonly accepted reference texts.
  • If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name "prominent" adherents .
  • If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Misplaced Pages (except perhaps in some ancilliary article), regardless if it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not.

For theories:

  1. State the valid concepts,
  2. State the known and popular ideas and identify general scientific "consensus", and
  3. Individual ideas (eg. stuff made up) should either goto 'votes for deletion' or be copyedited out.

The following are NOT grounds for exclusion:

  1. Listing claims which have little or no supporting evidence;
  2. Listing claims which contradict established conditions, explainations, or soulutions;
  3. Including research that fails to provide an possibility of reproducible results; or
  4. Citing viewpoints that violate Occam's Razor (the principle of choosing the simplest explanation when multiple viable explanations are possible).

Further reading:

Other encyclopedias

Places that do allow original research include the Internet-Encyclopedia and Everything 2.