MaterialWiki:No original research

This page documents an official policy on the MaterialWiki project. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. Please do not edit this page without first ensuring that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss changes first on the talk page.

The MaterialWiki project does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position. This means that MaterialWiki is not the place to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented.

No original research (NOR) is one of three content policies. The others are:

• Neutral point of view (NPOV)
• Verifiability (V).

Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in articles. Because they complement each other, they should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should familiarize themselves with all three.

Sources

Research that consists of collecting and organizing material from existing sources within the provisions of this and other content policies is encouraged: this is "source-based research," and it is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia. However, care should be taken to not "go beyond" what is expressed in the sources, nor use them in ways inconsistent with the intent of the source, such as using the information out of context. In short, stick to the sources.

Reliable sources

Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by a reliable source. "Original research" is a claim for which no reliable source can be found. Producing a reliable published source that advances the same claim taken in context is the only way to disprove an assertion that a claim constitutes original research. If there is a source, but the source or claim is disputed, that is not original research but rather a question of reliable sourcing or undue weight. However, using information from references out-of-context or to forward claims not directly supported by the sources is original research.

In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. As a rule of thumb, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. Material that is self-published, whether on paper or online, is generally not regarded as reliable, but see this section of Verifiability for exceptions.

Using sources

Information in an article must be verifiable in the references cited. Article statements generally should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, nor on passing comments. Passages open to interpretation should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source's author(s). Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references are cited in context and on topic.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources

For the purposes of MaterialWiki policies and guidelines, primary, secondary, and tertiary sources are defined as follows:[1]

• Primary sources are sources very close to the origin of a particular topic. An eyewitness account of a traffic accident is an example of a primary source. Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in MaterialWiki, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. For that reason, anyone—without specialist knowledge—who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the MaterialWiki passage agrees with the primary source. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. To the extent that part of an article relies on a primary source, it should:

• only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
• make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

Examples of primary sources include archeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations, published experimental results by the person(s) actually involved in the research; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs.[2]

Unsourced eyewitness accounts or other unsourced information obtained from personal experience should not be added to articles, as this would cause MaterialWiki to become a primary source for the added information (see MaterialWiki::Verifiability).

• Secondary sources are references that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims, or create a general overview.[3][4] Secondary sources are valued for analysis, broader context, and a more independent view. However, they can be biased by the views of their author(s) and/or publisher, so caution is required to preserve the neutral point of view. Care should also be taken to avoid undue weight and ensure the information cited is used in context.

• Tertiary sources are publications such as encyclopedias or other compendia that sum up many secondary and primary sources. For example, MaterialWiki itself is a tertiary source. Many introductory textbooks may also be considered tertiary to the extent they sum up widely accepted results of large amounts of primary and secondary sources. Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary and/or secondary sources.

All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to new analyses, syntheses or original conclusions that are not verifiable. Where interpretive claims, analysis, or synthetic claims are included in MaterialWiki articles, use appropriate sources rather than original analysis by MaterialWiki editors.

Appropriate sourcing is a complicated issue, and these are general rules. The decision whether primary or secondary sources are more suitable on any given occasion is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the website: [{{{url}}} {{{url}}}].