Proposal: Lessen rules about external references
Einstein would be unable to publish his special relativity on Wikiversity. No doubt it is wrong. Also Wikiversity was planned to be modeled after real-world universities and now happens to have stricter rules on original research than real-world universities. It is wrong.
The main trouble is: Wikiversity editors require "Arguments pro and con would need to be supported by additional resources. A single perspective is likely not sufficient." (a quote from Dave Braunschweig at Wikiversity:Help desk). I have not found this rule in the official rules, but Dave has the power to delete and this needs to be dealt with. Need to say about this explicitly in the official rules.
Einstein would be unable to publish at Wikiversity because before publication his work surely was not supported by additional resources. Additional resources appear after some time after publication of a new idea, not before it.
So the world completely lacks a media for publishing new ideas (yes, personal opinions) except of private Web sites. That's bad.
We need a way to publish new ideas and even personal opinions.
We can introduce the following rule: "A personal opinion published at Wikiversity shall be not easily provable to be false by field experts, neither shall it be an unfounded opinion, but shall provide some arguments (but not necessarily proofs) for the opinion)."
Another problem is that when somebody would publish his personal opinion, it is hard for his to follow NPOV, because he is not himself one of his opponents. So we should explicitly state: "Personal opinions can be published as original research. When publishing somebody's opinion as original research, it is allowed to omit opposing views in the hope that these may be added later." --VictorPorton (talk) 18:18, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
- Research-related pages