In my own opinion, peer-review is not sufficient for "surprising" results. Rather, another layer, that of "having your paper cited by others as a foundation for their own research" Or "having others confirm your findings" At that point, I would think it's acceptable. Too often new surprising results turn out to be errors. -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Gristock <[email protected]> To: Wikimedia Education <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Jul 10, 2014 12:15 pm Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Education] Overcoming a roadblock to engagement
Sent from my mobile > On 10 Jul 2014, at 19:57, Wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Once those findings have been verified by others in that field, we are in a different territory of course. > "New surprising findings", self-contributed, are anathema to encyclopedias. > In other words, Peer review. We're talking about citing published papers. Not just citing from your own website or anything like that of course! _______________________________________________ Education mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________ Education mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
