Search results
There is a page named "Wikipedia talk:No original research/Archive 6" on Wikipedia
- section is disputed". This would be no more a violation of "Avoid self-reference" than putting an "Original Research" or "NPOV" tag on sections of articles...99 KB (15,663 words) - 12:52, 23 October 2021
- the scholarly community. The original idea that is junk has source material. Refuting the idea will require original research because nobody else has done...12 KB (1,894 words) - 01:40, 22 September 2010
- talk:No original research/Archive 1 — January 16, 2004 – December 13, 2004 Wikipedia talk:No original research/Archive 2 — January 4, 2005 – August 6, 2005...3 KB (439 words) - 05:24, 5 January 2008
- Shortcuts WT:OR WT:NOR When will Wikipedia start allowing original research? 2601:646:8B00:D590:A8D8:A7CD:CD01:F7C5 (talk) 06:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)...40 KB (5,261 words) - 06:56, 5 July 2024
- reliable as the page(s) they archive, and using them in the way you have described is in no possible way Original Research. -- Y|yukichigai (ramble argue...290 KB (45,859 words) - 12:53, 13 April 2022
- (UTC) So the argument for "no original research" is one sentence from Jimbo Wales? deisenbe (talk) 02:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC) No, that one sentence is based...45 KB (5,963 words) - 05:24, 19 February 2023
- there's no effective explanation I can see in WP:NOR that explains why we don't use primary sources, and why using them is original research. SamBC(talk)...257 KB (40,372 words) - 16:17, 21 October 2021
- I have an interesting problem regarding the usage of original research. The issue deals with the Pool Forge Covered Bridge. One source claims that the...123 KB (19,616 words) - 05:24, 19 February 2023
- the point on original research. Something does not have to qualify as ground breaking research to fail the no original research policy. - Taxman Talk...161 KB (25,730 words) - 16:27, 4 February 2023
- this page, but I didn't see it. You can find the archives here Wikipedia talk:No original research (draft rewrite). Best, SlimVirgin 23:49, Mar 22, 2005...60 KB (9,805 words) - 17:56, 18 August 2021
- Proposals from talk page. Examples of proof of concept that No Original Research can and should be explained without using the words "primary" and "secondary"...256 KB (37,155 words) - 16:27, 4 February 2023
- the danger of original research. I believe it is overly strict for articles that rely predominantly on secondary sources. I go along with no analytic, synthetic...83 KB (13,112 words) - 10:17, 5 March 2022
- Original Text Original research refers to original research by editors of Wikipedia. It does not refer to original research that is published or available...366 KB (59,897 words) - 07:59, 15 December 2023
- point out that the theory of no original research, here displayed, is unpublished or, that is, is synthetic original research or a novel idea. However, what...261 KB (39,755 words) - 07:23, 16 May 2022
- talk:No original research. It matches the following masks: Wikipedia talk:No original research/Archive <#>, Wikipedia talk:No original research. This...277 KB (42 words) - 03:30, 4 July 2024
- talk pages. Research and debate should meet the same standards of verification, neutral point of view and no original research." Jakew 10:15, 6 May 2007...361 KB (58,564 words) - 09:47, 10 March 2023
- formal name and the nickname. Gerry Ashton 20:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC) That's not really an original research question, more of a reliability of sources question...293 KB (47,202 words) - 12:53, 23 October 2021
- contain original research; that is, research for which there is no reference other than projects in the Wikipedia namespace. Original research that does...252 KB (40,101 words) - 07:13, 8 July 2022
- 7 July 2007 (UTC) It is original research but we allow original research with regard to images as a special case so long as no one claims different. For...253 KB (39,332 words) - 16:17, 21 October 2021
- Wikipedia talk:No original research (draft rewrite 5th December 2004 to 5th February 2005)/Archive 4Wikipedia talk:No original research Wikipedia talk:No original research (draft rewrite) Wikipedia talk:No original research (draft rewrite -- archive 1) Wikipedia...49 KB (7,960 words) - 05:01, 5 January 2008
- books: "Archaeological Research in Nicaragua" published in 1881 by Dr. J.F. Bransford, former U.S. Navy assistant surgeon and researcher of the Smithsonian
- listed until the original poster has seen the explanation, or in any case after about a month, the page can be delisted from VfD and archived. (Slightly edited
- primary research such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining words, etc. If you have done primary research on a topic