Mastering Wikipedia Editing: What is Original Research
The “no original research” rule of Wikipedia exists to protect its integrity rather than create obstacles for editing purposes. The platform’s integrity depends on this rule because it protects Wikipedia from becoming a personal viewpoint or an unverified claims platform. Anyone managing their brand’s online visibility or making Wikipedia contributions for professional reasons must understand what counts as original research to make sure their edits stick.
This article explains Wikipedia’s definition of original research while presenting relevant examples to help you understand how to stay safe from common mistakes. The information builds upon the previous “The Big Fat Guide to Mastering Wikipedia’s Editing Rules,” which enhances your ability to make edits that benefit the platform.
Key Takeaways
- Wikipedia’s “no original research” rule maintains the platform’s content quality by stopping readers from accessing incorrect information.
- Any new interpretation or unverified analysis that has not been published in reliable secondary sources qualifies as original research regardless of its intellectual value.
- Every source needs to meet Wikipedia’s requirements for publication. The Wikipedia community rejects personal opinions as well as niche blog posts and anecdotal experiences from all editors. Wikipedia editors need to use only verifiable information from reputable publications as their source material.
- The formation of new original conclusions by combining facts from multiple sources exceeds the limits of acceptable Wikipedia research. Use sources as they present themselves, rather than trying to create your own interpretive mosaic.
- Include inline citations. The dual function of inline citations serves both aesthetic purposes and maintains transparency while ensuring accountability, thereby protecting your edits from removal or flagging.
- Your edits will pass the scrutiny test when you avoid original research, especially when you are representing your brand or company online.
What is Original Research on Wikipedia?
The “no original research” guideline supports Wikipedia’s mission to maintain neutrality while ensuring reliable information. The actual application of original research detection proves challenging because it demands precise identification of its boundaries.
Understanding Original Research Clearly
Wikipedia defines original research as any new ideas and analyses, together with conclusions that have not been published in credible secondary sources. Wikipedia does not welcome the introduction of personal theories, unpublished findings, or innovative interpretations based on existing sources. The platform exists as a collection of authenticated and documented knowledge.
Wikipedia allows editors to incorporate direct quotes from peer-reviewed scientific papers when they write about new technologies. Wikipedia should not accept your speculative thoughts about industry transformation, even if your argument appears reasonable. Editors who function as curators must verify all statements with published evidence rather than analyzing content or steering its direction.
Three typical cases of original research include:
- You cannot publish experimental results or internal company data unless it has been independently published by a third party.
- Creating original theories through the combination of multiple sources to develop new interpretations or narratives is considered original research.
- Speculative statements without any reliable secondary source evidence do not meet Wikipedia standards.
These examples will help you maintain Wikipedia compliance during your platform edits.
The reason Wikipedia does not allow original research is to ensure that its content is neutral and trustworthy.
Wikipedia pages lose their status as reliable fact documentation when they include personal opinions or unpublished materials because they shift toward becoming opinion-based platforms, while creating potential conflict of interest issues.
If you are writing about a historical event, it is better to use credible sources to combine their accounts into your own interpretation or analysis. This is a violation of Wikipedia’s neutral point of view since your insight is reasonable and your point of view is now at the forefront.
The implementation of such modifications often results in editorial disputes, which editors typically resolve by reverting to previous versions.
The issue damages Wikipedia readers’ confidence in the accuracy of information presented on the platform. Wikipedia readers expect to access verifiable information, rather than personal interpretations or speculative content.
The required citations from respected outlets serve as anchors to facts, contributing to Wikipedia’s overall reliability.
A failure to comply with the “no original research” policy will result in your page receiving tags that are challenging to remove:
By complying with the “no original research” policy, you not only ensure that you are complying with the rules, but also you are supporting Wikipedia’s mission. The policy also helps protect your brand’s credibility when you represent your company on Wikipedia. Every edit should be professional, responsible, and trustworthy, and therefore should be aligned with factual and published material.
Conclusion
The “no original research” policy exists to maintain the accuracy of Wikipedia information while building trust in the website’s content. Your commitment to published reliable sources will both gain approval for your edits and preserve Wikipedia’s position as a trustworthy worldwide reference source.
It is also important to understand the broader implications of Wikipedia’s stance on original research. The vast amount of subjective online content does not diminish Wikipedia’s position as a trusted source that delivers verified, accurate, and neutral information. Editors must perform two tasks: they need to demonstrate their expertise while choosing trusted sources and presenting the information correctly.
The choices you make while editing Wikipedia regarding citations will impact both research activities, business decisions, and casual reader interests. The application of strict standards in content creation will boost your reputation for content marketing, along with reputation management and general industry thought leadership.
Responsible editing goes beyond rule compliance because it means upholding truth alongside transparency to achieve the mutual goal of delivering reliable, meaningful information. The professional community, along with Wikipedia’s daily millions of readers, should benefit from your dedication to credibility through each edit because you understand its value.
