I can get original research anywhere on the internet.
Wikipedia is valuable precisely because I know it's a tertiary source that tries to cite only secondary sources and not primary ones. I want it to be an encyclopedia that separates the wheat from the chaff, that represents some level of consensus academic thought and cultural/historical notability. I don't want it to be the entire internet.
And important isn't really that subjective -- the notability guidelines are extremely extensive with lots of examples for each type of person (researcher, actor, etc.). Sure there will always be edge cases, but the guidelines really are quite thorough.
I can get original research anywhere on the internet.
Wikipedia is valuable precisely because I know it's a tertiary source that tries to cite only secondary sources and not primary ones. I want it to be an encyclopedia that separates the wheat from the chaff, that represents some level of consensus academic thought and cultural/historical notability. I don't want it to be the entire internet.
And important isn't really that subjective -- the notability guidelines are extremely extensive with lots of examples for each type of person (researcher, actor, etc.). Sure there will always be edge cases, but the guidelines really are quite thorough.