In myself, much astonishment can be found. Tim, sources copyrighted
have been, by you, off-ripped.
"was clearly ripped off from" from
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=19265&DisplayT…icle,
has, by you, been clearly plagiarised.
Unacceptability can be multitudinous in the plagiarism-like acts.
Easily can be spotted plagiarism, since obviously longer sequence than
4 words from some oddly-existing source must have been themselves
plagiarised.
On you shame I cast.
Mark
On 20/06/05, Tim Starling <t.starling(a)physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
Alphax wrote:
I've always held that anything over 5-6 words
is plagiarism, unless it
is quoted. Quotations are fair use provided they are cited appropriately.
Your unattributed quote "quotations are fair use" is plagiarism, and
that is unacceptable. You should give Joseph Carter credit where it is
due. He wrote "attributed quotations are fair use" in a post to
debian-legal:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/05/msg00001.html
, and your post was clearly ripped off from that.
Seriously though, I have seen a case where a Wikipedian slapped a
copyvio tag on something because it shared some phrases with a webpage.
The author complained that he had spent hours reading multiple sources,
and rewriting the information therein in his own words. That is
unequivocally acceptable under copyright law, and the tag was soon
removed. There's no need to be paranoid. We should be careful not to
accuse people of plagiarism who are merely paraphrasing or rewriting.
-- Tim Starling
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE