We, the humen beings perform the work of nomenclature of everything four our own purposes.

As per my consideration, everything created for the first time can be termed as a creative work.

If we follow this definition, then all sorts of publications with any new findings are definitely some creative writings.

Thanks.

I agree with Shibabrata Pattanayak, that all new work and ideas penned down by us in our publications can be considered creative. In fact to become researchers we have to be creative.

The creativeness of scientific workpieces depends on their breakthrough effect, in historical and methodical terms. Examples:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life%3F

http://einstein-annalen.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/home

https://oculus.nlm.nih.gov/cgi/f/findaid/findaid-idx?c=nlmfindaid;idno=calhoun586

Scientific methodology, work and writing can be conducted in a creative research way,

but not via the academic assembly line and legitimatory production pressure.

Creativity is there in all scientific research work and they should be called creative work irrespective of patentability

Scientific papers, articles, thesis can not be said creative (so much devoid of human feelings) if to see creativity in comparison with novels, stories and poems; yet scientific writing can be creative if we add the element of reflective writing (at the end of thesis or article) as what happened through all that process of scientific writing to researcher, then feelings and emotions can make these lifeless articles, thesis research papers .....having some life like elements and this could be no longer felt as they are written by some zombies who are strictly following some dead pattern to write articles.

Totally agrees with Satish Narula and Shibabrata Pattanayak viewpoint that any new findings are definitely possessed some creative writings.

The creative state of mind is fundamentally exploratory, seeking out new possibilities in the world around us. Some of the most incredible human inventions have come from great minds who had be creative in their thought and action. Scientific research and writing also need lots of creativity in generation of meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc. and their presentation in the form of research paper, scientific reports, thesis, etc. creatively.

Informative

Yes. A lot of imagination & creativity resulted in effective thesis writing.

Yes

Indeed scientific inventions and innovations are the result of creative thinking however, the magnanimity of the scientific work deserves better word than just, 'creative' .

A while genre of creative nonfiction and creative journalism arise in the latter half of Century XX with Tom Wolfe, Norman Mailer and Robert Pirsig being prime artisans. Scientific examples abound- even in Century XIX there was Flatland by Edwin Abbott Abbott about a two- dimensional universe. Modern physics now has many fascinating and innovative works involving deeply creative thinking.

Thank you all for your great contributions in this thread.

Let me drive this discussion wheel a bit further to those who suggest for alternative words other than the one used here........like Dr Dhanapati Sharma and some others..........

Can you please provide a few good words that may better represent or otherwise substitute the word "creative"?

Innovative might work.

They can be called as Creative Genius too.

Research is the process of solving current problems and answering to the novel questions through viable and reliable methods and creativity is a key factor in this respective process.

Yes

This article can serve a lot from the psychology of creativity it has been determined that thematic areas where scientific creativity stands out, also should be considered the amusement park approach of James Kaufman and Jhon Baer where it indicates several areas and has instruments with tasks related to the evaluation of creativity in five domains including scientific.

Simonton, D. (2009). Varieties of (scientific) creativity: A hierarchical model of domain-specific disposition, development, and achievement, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(5), 441-452.

Kaufman, J., & Baer, J. (2004). Sure, I'm creative-But not in mathematics! Self-reported creativity in diverse domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(2), 143-155. https://doi.org/10.2190/26hqvhe8-gtln-bjjm.

Kaufman, J. (2018). What Creativity Can Be, and What Creativity Can Do. In J.C. Kaufman & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Nature of Human Creativity, (pp. 125-133). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108185936.011.

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158-163.

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. (2017). The amusement park theoretical model of creativity: An attempt to bridge the domain-specificity/generality gap. In J.C. Kaufman, V.P. Glaveanu & J. Baer (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Thank you Dr Cristian Ramos-Vera for your great insight.

Jim Drummond is correct but unfortunately most scientific papers are routine and merely replicate what has gone before, exhibiting neither synthesis of the material nor creativity on any level. Many if not most seem like bureaucrats. Einstein's famous papers are in another language-maths-exhibiting enormous creativity. Probably because of the unofficial nature of the site, many do on RG. Journals for example often demand greater conformity.

Estoy de acuerdo que en todos los escritos la creatividad es importante. Solo que hay que tener en cuenta las características del texto científica