Difference between revisions of "Libre Pathology:Verifiability"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Personal experience== | ==Personal experience== | ||
Personal experience is '''not''' considered a reliable source. If you know something from experience, someone has probably written about it. Go find the reference! If it isn't written about, [[Libre Pathology]] is not the place to do so, as it is policy that there should be [[Libre Pathology:No original research|no original research]]. | Personal experience is '''not''' considered a reliable source. If you know something from experience, someone has probably written about it. Go find the reference! | ||
If it isn't written about, [[Libre Pathology]] is not the place to do so, as it is policy that there should be [[Libre Pathology:No original research|no original research]]. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 05:38, 12 April 2015
- LP:V and LP:RS redirect here
In Libre Pathology, verifiability is held as essential. There is less emphasis on "who" and more emphasis on "what proves it". As proponents of evidence based medicine, we want to see the evidence.
Sources should be reliable.
Open access sources
Open access sources are preferred, as they allow immediate verification of information.
Closed sources should not be avoided, as much good pathology information can currently only be found in closed sources.
Personal experience
Personal experience is not considered a reliable source. If you know something from experience, someone has probably written about it. Go find the reference!
If it isn't written about, Libre Pathology is not the place to do so, as it is policy that there should be no original research.