Jump to content

Wikiversity talk:Original research

Add topic
From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Jade Knight
This refers to a process of the community assessing published/posted research, and deeming it valid or otherwise. This could range from approval of projects before they are officially 'published' on Wikiversity, or just removal of projects that are not valid at all. It is impossible for this review board (or the Board of Research) to manually verify every claim made (without repeating the research), but they cam compare it to existing research. See User:Xenon/Research for my take on it. - Xenon (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Formal peer review depends on a special type of social process - a collaboration aimed at making the best possible use of existing ideas to assess new ideas. There are some general principles that might be called "research ethics" that can guide all research. Also, each domain of study and research has its own special techniques and methods. Wikiversity need a general set of guidelines built around scholarly ethical research practices and also a way to support communities of experts within each research discipline. Wikiversity must place restrictions on research projects that do not use scholarly and ethical research practices and do not find approval of their methods within a community of peers. --JWSchmidt 16:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
I want to underscore JWSchmidt's point about various fields having their own methods and requirements. These can actually differ quite markedly—as someone with history training, I am constantly disappointed with the sort of disregard for historical citation that I find in the research of other disciplines, for example, while, in their own disciplines, the research is often considered more than acceptable. Jade Knight 03:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply