Article hub: Difference between revisions

    (restoring sane version - a "separate wiki" to debate whether research is to be published is insane - it's a pass/fail decision that needs to be tied strictly to page it's "from" and "to", not a third)
    (rewrite to make issues clear, provide links to some methods, e.g. answer recommendation, TIPAESA)
    Line 16: Line 16:
    Currently [[research]] is dispersed to multiple sites such as [[Wikipedia]] for generic, encyclopedic information, [[CorpKnowPedia]] for information on corporations and [[Wiktionary]] for translation needs. This is not a problem since all points of research are licensed under [[GFDL]]
    Currently [[research]] is dispersed to multiple sites such as [[Wikipedia]] for generic, encyclopedic information, [[CorpKnowPedia]] for information on corporations and [[Wiktionary]] for translation needs. This is not a problem since all points of research are licensed under [[GFDL]]


    Note:  there is no [[ontological distinction]] between research and opinion:  research is the opinion of a researcher.  And anyone can be a "researcher". Thus, opinions are indistinguishable from other forms of research - except that one could say "facts are research, and analysis is opinion.  [[Critical Point of View]] articles that don't even pretend to be [[NPOV|neutral]].  These are part of "research" but clearly marked. They are often drawn from outside text, in the form of [[campaign]]s for and against some entity, such as [[company]], [[product group]], [[product|individual product]], [[area]] ([[country]], [[ecoregion]]) or a piece of [[advertising]] which is clearly promotional.  An opinion starts as the lowest-credibility form of research and those who provide it will often be engaged with the [[Lowest Troll]] to determine if the authors or transmitters or republishers are [[funded troll]]s being paid to trash or promote some commercial service.
    Note:  there is no [[ontological distinction]] between research and opinion:  research is the opinion of a researcher.  And anyone can be a "researcher".   Thus, opinions are indistinguishable from other forms of research - except that one could say "facts are research, and analysis is opinion."  
     
    There's some question of what to do with [[Critical Point of View]] articles that don't even pretend to be [[NPOV|neutral]].  These are part of "research" but must be clearly marked - maybe awaiting [[answer recommendation]] filters?  
     
    They are often drawn from outside text, maybe via [[corpus import]], e.g.[[campaign]]s for and against some entity:  [[company]], [[product group]], [[product|individual product]], [[area]] ([[country]], [[ecoregion]].  They may be a piece of [[advertising]] which is clearly promotional. 
     
    Separating them is unwise.  An opinion starts as the lowest-credibility form of research, undergoes [[TIPAESA]] debate, and those who provide it will often be engaged with the [[Lowest Troll]] to determine if the authors or transmitters or republishers are [[funded troll]]s being paid to trash or promote some commercial service.  But no one will volunteer to separate "research" from "opinion" and to do so simply creates unaccountable [[sysop power structure]].


    ----
    ----
    Retrieved from "https://develop.consumerium.org/wiki/Article_hub"