What *fundamentalcharacteristic distinguishes legitimate synthesis of information from prohibited original research on Wikipedia?

The *fundamentalcharacteristic that distinguishes legitimate synthesis of information from prohibited original research on Wikipedia is whether the resulting conclusion is explicitly stated or directly supported by the cited sources *individuallyor collectively. Legitimate synthesis involves combining information from multiple reliable sources to present a coherent and comprehensive overview of a topic. This is acceptable as long as the synthesized text does not introduce any new claims, ideas, or interpretations that are not already present in the sources themselves. The synthesis should be a straightforward summarization or restatement of existing knowledge. Prohibited original research, on the other hand, occurs when editors use synthesis to advance a new position or argument that is not explicitly supported by the sources. This involves drawing inferences, making connections, or reaching conclusions that require the reader to make an additional interpretative step beyond what the sources state directly. If the sources do not explicitly support the synthesized claim, it constitutes original research, even if the editor believes the conclusion is logically sound. The key is that the synthesis must be an *obviousconsequenceof the sources, not a novel interpretation.