Wikipedia:No original research: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

m

Line 20:

Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by a reliable source. Material for which no reliable source can be found is considered original research. The only way you can show that your edit does not come under this category is to produce a reliable published source that contains that same material. Even with well-sourced material, however, if you use it out of context or to advance a position that is not '''directly and explicitly''' supported by the source used, you as an editor are engaging in original research; see [[WP:SYN|below]].

In general the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. As a rule of thumb, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. [[WP:SPS| Self-published]] material, whether on paper or online, is generally not regarded as reliable, althoughbut theresee [[WP:SPS|below]] arefor exceptions.

If you are able to discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to première such a discovery. Once your discovery has been presented in a reliable source, however, it may be referenced. But note the above regarding self-publication of your discovery.