On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 15:57:40 -0500, steven l. rubenstein
<rubenste(a)ohiou.edu> wrote:
Silverback wrote:
but it is banned by NOR, unless a cite can be
provided where someone else
has used those very same words in subject at hand.
This is still completely wrong. There is no requirement that someone else
has used the very same words. To follow this understanding of NOR would
mean that editors can't write anything, but can only edit together collages
of quotes -- this makes a mockery of the NOR policy. Paraphrasing does not
violate NOR. Period. Your position here will have only one consequence:
to make it harder to write good articles. Why would you want to do that?
A paraphrase of a significant document such as the Constitution should
be labelled as such using one of the conventional forms. Stating it is
a fact that it says something it actually does not is misleading, to
be charitable.
--
Peter in Canberra