From: Vicki Rosenzweig vr@redbird.org Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 10:16:01 -0400 To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On Plagiarism
At 08:00 AM 5/31/03 -0600, you wrote:
From a recent New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/31/books/31BOMB.html?tntemail1
'The Naval Academy's history department, in its guidelines on plagiarism, states that citations "must clearly and explicitly guide the reader to the sources used" and that writers must indicate "all use of another's words, even if they constitute only part of a sentence, with quotation marks and specific citation."
Those are standards for footnoting term papers; interesting, but not what we're doing.
The subject addressed in the NYT article is a book. Not what we are doing either, but the author of the times article seems to advance the principle in a general sense to include all writing.
A statement on plagiarism that is posted on the Web site of the American Historical Association states that a historian "should never simply borrow and rephrase the findings of other scholars" and that "the clearest abuse is the use of another's language without quotation marks and citation."'
And we *really* aren't writing academic papers or books that claim to be original research. In fact, if it's original research, it doesn't belong in the Wikipedia.
Right, but some folks here, expecially academics, regularly invoke academic standards in discussing articles here. Original research does not need to be footnoted anyway.
Fred