I'm not terribly sure where to chime in here, I hope this is appropriate.
I'm from SSA (now emigrated) and have encountered many issues along the way that I know have discouraged many. One of those is the issue of "Own research". I have read over a lot of the discussion around the Edit Assist, and everywhere I see the assumption that the Wp policies are graven in stone and all that needs to happen is to educate users.
Then I saw this question about asking users WHY they decline to reference. While I understand the probable motivation, for a lot of users being confronted with this for the first time, they will see that as seriously passive-aggressive and hostile. I'm hopeful that the further discussions on how to phrase the question will address this.
The real issue for me is this concept on WP that "if it's not referenced ''to our standards'' then it doesn't belong". Then I see that part of the stated intention of this project is to "fill in the gaps" from people's knowledge. Which is true? Does something only get onto WP if it has been '''widely''' reported on in the media or academic journals? That clashes somewhat with the stated intention. Is there not a way of allowing actual local user knowledge? As an example, I deployed to the DRC with the Force Intervention Brigade. I spent a year there and was intimately involved up to the Brigade level, and a little at the Division level. I saw ALL the documentation of all the activities inter alia combat, planning, staff meetings at the highest levels, interaction with the UN dignitaries, Post Battle damage assessments, Pre-battle plans, Indirect fire plans, Air Movement orders and debriefs, post combat debriefs and a plethora of other such stuff. I have an archive of a lot of that documentation on my computer. NONE of it is allowed to influence anything I write on WP! I cannot even challenge false information which is reliably resourced (to WP standards) but is absolutely false. I am very good friends with the guy who made the 212m Sniper kill shot outside Munigi. I have the medal citation, the post-battle debrief document etc. Him and I just laugh at the inaccuracies of the accounts of what happened which we cannot (may not?) correct.