ForumsWEPRPlagiarism and Reliable Sources

56 31676
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,034 posts
Farmer

**Plagiarism**

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or purloining and
publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions, and the representation of them
as one's own original work."


Sources: Wiki
Book: Webster's Dictionary

There are two kinds of plagiarism:
-- deliberate plagiarism is where you are intentionally plagiarizing for
personal gain;
-- accidental plagiarism is where you mistakenly plagiarize without intention, whether it is
from incorrectly citing your sources, have a complete or partial ignorance to plagiarism or citing, or have
a complete disregard for citing.
Both types of plagiarism are grounds for referrals to the sticky, warnings,
and bans. (Freakenstein)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this section of the forum we want all your posts to be original. This is a debate forum. Citations and original ideas are very important. Please try to follow these guidelines when posting here:

1. All opinions are welcome as long as there is evidence to back up those claims.
(Subjective views do have a place and time)

2. If any portion of your post has been copied from somewhere else besides your own work, then a source MUST be provided.

3. All sources that are cited must be reliable. (This brings us to the next important topic)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**Reliable Sources**

Again, I've decided to quote wiki on this, but please read the end where I discuss Wikipedia. Wikipedia explains reliable sources in such a simple and great way.

The word "source" as used on Wikipedia has three related meanings: the piece of work itself (the article, book), the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work (The New York Times, Cambridge University Press). All three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both.

Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited.


Source: Wiki

Please remember to determine if your source is biased or objective. Here are a few tips for spotting a biased source:

-- Opinions masked as facts

-- The article/journal is peer-reviewed (when applicable)

-- Examine the validity of the study, if one is used (Sample size, diversity, etc)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why cite your sources?

-- To give the information's credit to the author

-- Allows for further reading on the topic

-- Increase your credibility on AG

(Freakenstein and Asherlee)

How to cite

-- A simple link:

If you are starting a thread, it is already expected of you to provide a source for what the thread will be about. Simply copy and paste the URL and provide what/where the source is. You can even use words with the links (refer to BBCode Guide v.4.1 for details)."

-- Use Parenthetical Notes

"INFORMATION" (AUTHOR/SITE, YEAR) " You don't have to go into detail and use MLA or APA format, just properly show where you are getting your information from. If you are using a direct source, just quote the info, provide where you found it, and your credibility is saved.

(Freakenstein)

What about paraphrasing?

Paraphrasing is a restatement of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another form.
(Source: Webster)

The use of paraphrasing in WEPR is accepted. We should all strive to post a source when paraphrasing another's work. The source does not always have to be a link, a simple mention of where you received your information would suffice. However, if you are challenged by another user on AG to show evidence of your claims, then you must post your source without exception.

(Kudos thepossum for bringing this to light)

What do I do if I spot plagiarism?

Don't spend time on the thread pointing out that someone just plagiarized--report it to a moderator.
Provide 3 links:

1. The user you believe is plagiarizing
2. The actual post he/she plagiarized
3. If you've found the original work

(Asherlee and Freakenstein)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see, I quoted and sourced wikipedia for some sections of this post. Wikipedia can be a reliable source. You can determine whether or not the information you are using from a Wikipedia article is reliable by referencing the superscripted numbers:

http://i52.tinypic.com/9blzz4.png

will take you to here:

http://i54.tinypic.com/n5htg0.png

These are the references you want to check for reliablity.

  • 56 Replies
Skeleton_Pilot
offline
Skeleton_Pilot
1,366 posts
Jester

I think the internet really has decreased plagiarism.


Very true now, but keep in mind that it was the internet that caused the spike in plagiarism in the first place!
ryjo1026
offline
ryjo1026
4 posts
Peasant

I like to use noodle tools to cite sources and it organizes info too. Also most .edu, .gov sites have how to site the source at the bottom.

godandd
offline
godandd
1,293 posts
Shepherd

People need to lighten up about plagiarism. If money is not involved and you share the same view points as another person and don't want to spend time typing the exact same thing more or less, why not copy and paste it? It wouldn't technically be plagiarizing (As long as you point out you did not write it yourself)

Sp0ngeB0b
offline
Sp0ngeB0b
5 posts
Peasant

Plagiarism is a easy way to get an A on a assignment. Yet, chances are you're going to get caught and if you're an adult you can get sued for a bunch of money. Probably most people have done it, but there are ways to go around plagiarism. Just read the information and put it into your own words, it's that easy! It might take longer but you'll still get a good grade (in school) and you wont get sued (adults!)

Jefferysinspiration
offline
Jefferysinspiration
3,182 posts
Blacksmith

People need to lighten up about plagiarism. If money is not involved and you share the same view points as another person and don't want to spend time typing the exact same thing more or less, why not copy and paste it? It wouldn't technically be plagiarizing (As long as you point out you did not write it yourself)

- Asherlee

If any portion of your post has been copied from somewhere else besides your own work, then a source MUST be provided.

You can copy and paste it, just cite it.

lagiarism is a easy way to get an A on a assignment. Yet, chances are you're going to get caught and if you're an adult you can get sued for a bunch of money. Probably most people have done it, but there are ways to go around plagiarism. Just read the information and put it into your own words, it's that easy! It might take longer but you'll still get a good grade (in school) and you wont get sued (adults!)

- Hilarious.
Pharoahs
offline
Pharoahs
6 posts
Peasant

mang I never been cited for plagerism. Preatty funny how imagination can get you an A+ on papers

Pharoahs
offline
Pharoahs
6 posts
Peasant

and I concur that internet has indeed played a big role in plagerism. Without the internet, the local liibrary would probably be packed to the max.

dr_doughnut
offline
dr_doughnut
72 posts
Peasant

Plagiarism is one thing I cannot stand. I hate when people copy and paste entries on websites and do not cite it. Most teachers can see when something is plagiarized. People are too lazy to write something and too lazy to just cite things.

shock457
offline
shock457
710 posts
Farmer

For some reason, my English Teacher explains that Google is not reliable. She says that Google sorts out information by popularity. If you think about that is true.

Not even Wikipedia is reliable for obvious reasons.

Only good reliable sources are primary sources such as, books, newspapers, objects. Even son websites will be relliable (Government databases). Those are some of the most reliable sources you can ever use.

Skulltivator
offline
Skulltivator
638 posts
Peasant

She says that Google sorts out information by popularity. If you think about that is true.


That would explain why it's so hard to find relevant information on certain subjects. Google can be a pain in the brain if you want to find specific details on something.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
Scribe

my English Teacher explains that Google is not reliable.


Either you misunderstood your English teacher, or your English teacher doesn't know what she is talking about.

Google is a search engine. It functions on key words and boolean search methods. Yes, people can pay to have their websites show up at the top in cases of those key words, and the auto-complete function is based on popular search terms. The results you get from Google depend on how precise of a search you do and the topic.

Not even Wikipedia is reliable for obvious reasons.


Wikipedia is a good starting place to learn basic information about whatever. If ever you don't trust something it says, look at the citation where the information is coming from.

Only good reliable sources are primary sources such as, books, newspapers, objects.


I don't think you understand what a primary source is. A primary source is information given by someone directly related to the event or topic, or research personally conducted. This doesn't make it any more accurate necessarily than a secondary source, which is information that was learned from somewhere else and reapplied.

Books, newspapers, interviews, artifacts and such show a different side, but you have to remember that (in cases of newspaper/interviews/books) these were written or said by people who hold an opinion and are going to present their information in a way that follows their thoughts.

Even son websites will be relliable (Government databases). Those are some of the most reliable sources you can ever use.


The tag at the end is usually a good indicator for preliminary searching on whether you have a possible good source. .edu and .gov are often good, but it helps to check the credentials of where the information is coming from.

Google can be a pain in the brain if you want to find specific details on something.


You just have to learn how to use it.

Quick tutorial on how to use boolean search terms and what they do.
Skulltivator
offline
Skulltivator
638 posts
Peasant

You just have to learn how to use it.


That doesn't work for everything. Specific details cannot always be found this way. If, for example you want to know the name of Gary Busey's maternal grandmother, boolean search terms aren't going to help you there. The most popular results are always going to be about Gary Busey, not about his maternal grandmother, and you can't search "gary busey's maternal grandmother NOT gary busey" because his name is already in the search and you can't expect to find results about his grandmother that don't mention him.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
Scribe

. If, for example you want to know the name of Gary Busey's maternal grandmother, boolean search terms aren't going to help you there. The most popular results are always going to be about Gary Busey, not about his maternal grandmother, and you can't search "gary busey's maternal grandmother NOT gary busey" because his name is already in the search and you can't expect to find results about his grandmother that don't mention him.


Sure they can help.

Just do "Gary Busey AND grandmother"

I found his maternal grandmother's name in under 20 seconds.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
Bard

i tried the technique for a movie title that i didn't remember.
but wasn't able to find the movie. only a dozen other movies.

there are things you can't find this way. (or any other way for this example xD (only a 30 sec click on youtube in greek.)

Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
Scribe

i tried the technique for a movie title that i didn't remember.


You can't search for information on something if you don't know what you're looking for...duh.

there are things you can't find this way


Of course there are. However, you can find at least some information on -most- topics if you do it right. There's also the difference between getting results, and getting good results.
Showing 31-45 of 56