The "no original research" policy is fine when it prevents self-citation, but when it prevents citation of little-read but thoroughly credible third-party sources such as court transcripts that's a different matter.
No, it's really not. The proper venue for interpretation of little-read primary sources like court transcripts is a book or journal article, not an encyclopedia.
Nobody's talking about interpretation. I was referring to mere verification that the source exists and says what it's claimed to. That can and should happen in an encyclopedia.
