[WikiEN-l] Re: Plagiarism Policy, was A Missing Policy

Tue Jul 19 15:36:15 UTC 2005

I was always taught that if you can find the same fact in three
sources that don't reference a common source then it's "common
knowledge" (you could find that fact so many places it doesn't warrant
referencing).  So in this case if one or two obits had a really unique
fact (one of mine had an anecdote about getting into a brawl outside
Senate chambers and subsequently being politically discredited) then I
would reference it, but if the rest of the bio you write contains
facts that are in all five I wouldn't reference them but pick the good
ones as further reading or external links.

Laura Scudder

On 7/19/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Clearly you should list each of the 4-5 online obituaries as sources.
> 
> Fred
> 
> On Jul 19, 2005, at 4:30 AM, J.F. de Wolff wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > There are many grey areas when dealing with plagiarism. Personally,
> > when I write a biographical article I end up sifting through 4-5
> > online obituaries and merging the contents without much
> > paraphrasing. Much of the information in those sources is second-
> > hand and often equally unreferenced.
> >
> > Where does one draw the line? When there is only one good-going
> > source of material and this is paraphrased extensively, it should
> > be referenced. There are many instances, however, where using the
> > term "reference" would be a bit of an overstatement.
> >
> > JFW
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.0/50 - Release Date:
> > 16/07/2005
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>