Talk:Guardian Medal
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Guardian Medal, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.foxfall.com/fmd-dot-guardian.htm.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- The information that was supposedly infringed upon is taken directly from US Government sources specifically here: [1]. EricSerge (talk) 19:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing
editSee WP:close paraphrasing. A good chunk of this article is much too closely paraphrased from here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- The source cited is close paraphrased from here [2] and here [3]. Should I just drop that reference and keep the gov references? EricSerge (talk) 04:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'd say yes, unless there is unique information from that source. I'm not familiar with the website, so I don't know if it's a qualifying WP:SPS, but the government website is certainly reliable for the info. More importantly, when closely paraphrasing or copying from public domain sources, please use one of the attribution templates provided for this or otherwise note that you are duplicating/closely following content. This helps keep compliant with Wikipedia:Plagiarism (even if cited, Wikipedia regards content as plagiarized if copying is not explicitly noted) and also helps avoid later confusion if non-governmental sources utilize the same text. I'll go ahead and add it in here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, I've attributed the first content. The next section seems to also contain copied and closely paraphrased text from that source. Is this content also contained in a source that is verifiably PD? If so, please cite it and add the {{PD-notice}} in the ref. If not, can you please rewrite that material so that the duplicated content (example: "These two sections are separated by five stars at the three o'clock and nine o'clock positions. The reverse bears the words "FOR SERVICE TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN GUARDING THE INTERESTS OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC".") no longer appear? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'd say yes, unless there is unique information from that source. I'm not familiar with the website, so I don't know if it's a qualifying WP:SPS, but the government website is certainly reliable for the info. More importantly, when closely paraphrasing or copying from public domain sources, please use one of the attribution templates provided for this or otherwise note that you are duplicating/closely following content. This helps keep compliant with Wikipedia:Plagiarism (even if cited, Wikipedia regards content as plagiarized if copying is not explicitly noted) and also helps avoid later confusion if non-governmental sources utilize the same text. I'll go ahead and add it in here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)