Wikipedia talk:Training/For students/Copyright and plagiarism

src: images.slideplayer.com

Video Wikipedia talk:Training/For students/Copyright and plagiarism

Problem with explanation of plagiarism

Could you please redo this video, to correct the grossly inadequate description of what constitutes plagiarism, and to be more specific about what is and is not allowed on Wikipedia?

Specifically, my complaint is that this video gives the impression that any copying or close paraphrasing of material from other sources is not allowed, ever. There is no mention of the fact that copying (or close paraphrasing) of suitably-licensed open source materials, while giving it proper attribution, is allowed on Wikipedia.

I think this is very important, because, especially in the domain of science, more and more open access (in the true sense of being free to reuse) material is being made available, and we would be shooting ourselves in the foot if we continue to give editors the impression that they are not allowed to reuse this material in articles.

While I think most of the video is technically correct, the wording is definitely such that it gives the impression that no copying or close paraphrasing is allowed. I would urge that it be clarified to explicitly state that copying freely reusable material, while giving proper attribution, is allowed. See WP:PLAG#Copying_material_from_free_sources.

Here are some specific problem quotes:

You can't just copy from a book or web site to build a Wikipedia article.

This is wrong.

It's worth looking at Wikipedia's rules ... in a little more detail.

I agree with this. Let's mention all of the important details.

It's not a good idea to write for WP by copying a source and then rewriting it bit-by-bit.

This is only true when you're talking about closed-access materials.

If an article about a court case includes passages from a ruling without indicating it, this is plagiarism, even if the copied text is in the public domain.

True, technically, but mention should be made of the fact that it's okay to copy text if proper attribution is given.

@Klortho: Thanks! I wrote it to be an introduction to plagiarism on Wikipedia that goes over the most common problems, rather than a full treatment of what is and is not allowed. For newcomers, it's essential to trim out as many unnecessary details as possible; I'd like to keep this as a ~3 minute video rather than the much longer one that would be required to cover every important but uncommon edge case. However, it shouldn't give the impression that copying from free sources while giving the proper attribution is not allowed. For the "you can't just copy..." quote, the word "just" is the qualifier that was meant to keep it technically correct, although I see how it can be misleading. If I redo this video, I will add a brief explanation of how it's okay to use free sources if there's proper attribution.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 14:29, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I really hope you do. I just don't think it's an "unnecessary detail" at all. After all, we want good content in Wikipedia, right? A lot of free and open access stuff is of a lot higher quality than an average student could right on his or her own. Klortho (talk) 18:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia