Vikipedio:Ne faru originalan esploradon: Malsamoj inter versioj

sen resumo de redaktoj
La informoj en artikolo devas esti [[vikipedio:kontrolebleco|kontroleblaj]] en la cititaj fontindikoj. Asertoj en la artikoloj ĝenerale ne fidu je neklaraj aŭ nekonsekvencaj eltiraĵoj, nek je pretertemaj komentoj.
 
Eltiraĵojn, kiuj estas interpreteblaj en pli ol unu maniero, oni devas citi ekzakte aŭ entute eviti. Resumoj de ampleksaj diskutoj devas speguli la konkludojn de la font-aŭtoro. Fari konkludojn, kiuj ne estas evidentaj en la fonto, estas originala esplorado, sendepende de la fonttipo. Nepras, ke oni citu la fontojn en sia kunteksto kaj en la sama temo.
<!-- Passages open to interpretation should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source's author(s). Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references be cited in context and on topic.
 
===PrimaryUnuarangaj, secondary,duarangaj andkaj tertiarytriarangaj sourcesfontoj===
<span id="PSTS" />{{policy shortcut|[[WP:PSTS]]}}
For the purposes of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, primary, secondary, and tertiary sources are defined as follows:<ref>Various professional fields treat the distinction between primary and secondary sources in differing fashions. Some fields and references also further distinguish between secondary and tertiary sources. Primary, secondary and tertiary sources are broadly defined here for the purposes of Wikipedia.</ref>
 
Rilate al la politiko de Vikipedio oni uzas la jenajn difinojn de unuaranga, duaranga kaj triaranga fonto:
*'''Primary sources''' are sources very close to the origin of a particular topic. An eyewitness account of a traffic accident is an example of a primary source. Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. For that reason, anyone—without specialist knowledge—who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Wikipedia passage agrees with the primary source. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. To the extent that part of an article relies on a primary source, it should:
 
*'''Unuarangaj fontoj''' estas fontoj tre proksimaj al la origino de specifa temo. Okula atestanto de trafika kolizio estas ekzemplo de unuaranga fonto. Oni rajtas uzi unuarangajn fontojn publikigitajn de fidinda fonto en Vikipedio, sed oni atentu ĉar estas facile misuzi ilin.
 
*'''Primary sources''' are sources very close to the origin of a particular topic. An eyewitness account of a traffic accident is an example of a primary source. Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.<-!! For that reason, anyone—without specialist knowledge—who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Wikipedia passage agrees with the primary source. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. To the extent that part of an article relies on a primary source, it should:
:* only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
:*make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.
752

redaktoj