Dear Mabrouk Boutagouga

It is possible of course, but the author either has to be a great scientist and does not need to quote from other sources, or he may be ignorant, knows nothing.

In any case, there can be no credibility for that article..

Regards

It is not possible, unless you want to claim that no one in the world have written any thing about the topic.

@bahtilla Marinette Is it possible that one researcher can be the first one writing about a topic, and then he has no work to cite

This paper has no citation. Altough it is possible, other people will generally think that is not useful. Also, the paper visibility is very limited. Unless, you are very genius who open entirely new and exticing field of knowledge.

I think the question is about journal article. Some one can write a note for teaching a course without citing anything, although it is professional to put references. However articles for journals need references, for otherwise editors and reviewers will not be able to review it be rejected immediately.

No , we must acknowledge the ideas of others. specific ideas of the authors matters lot, in all documents

Opinionnaire articles can be written like that.

The work of an article is based on theories that have certainly been developed by recent references or not to increase the value of an contribution. Without putting references, you can't develop previous or recent ideas of a subject that has been worked by others.

Einstein did (so they say)

Dear Mabrouk Boutagouga

It is possible of course, but the author either has to be a great scientist and does not need to quote from other sources, or he may be ignorant, knows nothing.

In any case, there can be no credibility for that article..

Regards

This question is similar to "Can one publish an article that doesn't have a title name?" The latter is definitely impossible, the former is highly questionable and unusual.

Research articles conditionally speaking can be sorted in the following three buckets: (1) articles that open a new problem, (2) articles that continue known problem, and (3) articles that close a certain problem. The bulk of articles belongs to the second bucket.

Simple logic advises that buckets (2) and (3) would definitely require certain citations. Hence, the issue at the consideration is as to whether articles in the first bucket can be published without any citations.

If I were an editor or reviewer, I would never advise an author to do so for the following reasons:

- Science is knowledge accumulation and research. Whatever is really new is just a new chapter in a known science. Therefore, at least the boundaries of that new chapter have to be clarified in appropriate citation(s).

- Typically, any new discovered thing was either discussed earlier, or was envisioned / predicted by someone(s), or failed attempts were made known and could be cited.

- Theoretical discoveries in bucket (1) most likely were completely or partially inspired by prior works in this particular science, or in mathematics, or in philosophy, or by analogies in other sciences, and could be cited.

- Experimental discoveries in bucket (1) is the only case that could require a special investigation as to how it was managed in prior cases of the same or similar sciences.

Dr. Mabrouk, in this modern world, it is impossible not to find related topics.

The citations represent your theoretical framework on which your study was based.

I cannot imagine topic on which absolutely no other work has been done that is even somewhat close, meaning that there is no theoretical framework on which to base the new study.

Of course there are predatory journals that will print anything in exchange for money, but these will not serve your career well.

It would depend on how many cognac are consumed during the process...

Absolutely no, even letters to the editor and communication pieces are based on previously done work.

In my opinion, the fewer references are, the more originality is. However, I do believe that a theoretical framework of any research, specially in social and human fields, can not be done without being based on previous studies.

No its impossible , citations helps us to to substantiate previous knowledge with present existing knowledge and also helps to maintain integrity in writing and publishing truth.

Henri Becquerel discovered natural radioactivity literally by accident without any prior citation, quote, or reference. It's a very rare event in a history of sciences:

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1903/becquerel/biographical/

يمكن ذلك ، إذا كان الموضوع جديدا وشخصيا لأنه يعتمد على اجتهاد الفرد وملاحظاته ، لكن هناك الكثير من الموضوعات لا يمكن كتابنها دون الاقتباس والاستشهاد أو الارتكاز على مرجع معين.

For every reviewer, for every editorial board an author of an article without any citation would look like the 'odd man out'. In my prior posts, I've mentioned that the only rarest event when such a situation could be justified would be an unexpected experimental discovery of a natural phenomenon which nature haven't been discussed before.

No, it's absolutely impossible and questionable. There's really no new thing under the sun. What is now is what had been or mentioned but left un-verified. Initiation of research in that area requires the mention of that idea or hypothesis in a citation.

No