User talk:Grlucas/Discussion: Sourcing/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

The following are some guidelines for choosing, paraphrasing, and crediting sources:

Tips for Sourcing

• Blog posts and press releases are generally considered unreliable sources for information. Blog posts are generally not peer reviewed, may be subjective, and may have claims not supported by reliable sources many times including links to other bloggers (Dmcgonagill (talk) 21:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)). A press release would also be considered unreliable as its purpose is to promote; the writers of press releases, generally public relations professionals, also have an agenda-to persuade the audience that the person or event being promoted is newsworthy itself, rather than simply providing factual information that is verifiable.
• A company’s website is also problematic as a source for reliable information, particularly about the company itself. Organizations have an agenda, to sell their product and promote their images.
• Copyright violation and plagiarism are both a type of theft. Copyright violation means using any part of copyrighted material or works without having permission of the author or copyright holder. Plagiarism more specifically refers either not crediting a source or paraphrasing the source too closely to the original author's words.
• Close paraphrasing and plagiarism should be avoided. Close paraphrasing uses similar wording and structure of a source, rather than actually paraphrasing. Plagiarism is not giving credit to a source being used or not appropriately paraphrasing the source in new words. Both are non-issues by making sure the source is understood before noted. Reading the source using reading comprehension strategies like annotating or underlining key ideas and then noting the main ideas without looking at the source are good tips. Comparing the new notes to the original source afterwards to identify any accidental reliance on the source’s words is also advised. Avoid close paraphrasing by not simply cutting and pasting the source information into a Word document and then using a thesaurus to change a few words. Avoid plagiarism by highlighting source information during drafting to remember to cite sources in-text, but do not forget to remove the highlighting as sources are cited. Highlighting quantifies the amount of contributing sources and allows for checking correct use of paraphrasing. Visit Purdue OWL for further help practicing paraphrasing and avoiding plagiarism. (Dmcgonagill (talk))

Sourcing in Wikipedia

Source

A reliable source is an independent, neutral source reporting only verifiable data; a source having no relationship to the subject being researched, free of biased reporting, and the information is published by credible publishers. A blog post, a press release, and a company’s website do not meet Wikipedia’s established criteria for a reliable source and may be biased or promote self-interest.

Material

Copyrighted material requires the originator, or the executor of estate, of the material to give consent for any use of their work. Copyright infringement occurs when individuals use authors’ work without the authors'/executors' express permissions. Quoting copyrighted work is not permissible when conducting research for Wikipedia articles. Plagiarism occurs when a researcher paraphrases or directly quotes an author but does not give credit to the author for the published or unpublished work. Wikipedia also considers similarities in organization and phrasing even when crediting the original author, or correctly citing a source word for word and giving original author credit to be plagiarism. Simply using synonyms or rearranging the authors words are viewed as a form of plagiarism.

Avoidance Plagiarism

A method for avoiding close paraphrasing and plagiarism is researching to become familiar with a topic. Gaining an understanding of the material will enable researchers to summarize the work in their own words and minimize any risk of mirroring the author.

~~~~Dillbug

@Dillbug: Dillbug, I did a few minor edits to a couple of sentences but I really like the brevity and clarity of your definitions and explanations. I wish I could be more concise! Do you think the header Avoidance should be more specific: Avoiding Plagiarism (perhaps?) JVbird (talk) 13:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

{{reply to | JVbird}} I do agree that Avoiding Plagiarism is a more accurate header. It all reads very well. Mango Masala 20:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

[[reply to|JVbird}} Thank you for your suggestions and changes. I agree, the heading for Avoidance needed to be more specific and made the necessary change. I am lucky to be part of such a supportive group!Dillbug (talk) 15:36, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I think I'm confused on this one. Is this where we are to discuss sources and plagiarism?

If so, plagiarism is a terrible idea. It's very dishonest and ethically wrong to make someone else's words yours without giving them credit or citing ::the proper source. I would say that it speaks volumes for a person's character to pass someone else's words and work off as their own without proper ::citing. It's almost like telling a lie. Example. Your roommate has a Dodge Charger and pays the monthly payments for it. You have a Toyota Camry and pay ::monthly payments on it. You take your roommate to work one day, joy ride in it, and tell everyone it's yours. The right thing to do would be to give the ::proper source the proper credit. Just a thought. Ssimsjones (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

References

Blog Post, Press release, Copyrights, and Plagiarism

1)    Blog posts and press releases are poor sources of reliable information. Why?

a.    Blog post and press release may seem like a reliable source but it can be misleading at times. Blog post are an individual opinions about an idea or subject in area but there is no peer review to support their claim. Press release are similar to blog post but there is a slight difference between the two, which is a press release tries to promote a subject.

2)   What are some reasons you might not use a company’s website as the main source of information about that company?

a.   When doing research, using a company’s website may not always be the best source of information. However, the reliability of the answer often depends on the question. A lot of websites are biased because they are promoting their company, and therefore are doing everything they can to promote their service. Another reason that a company’s website is not always a good source of information is because the company usually only gives information on their company. A company page often times does not compare the facts of their product to other companies with the same information.

3)   What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?

a.   Copyright violation and plagiarism are similar, but have a couple of defining differences. A copyright violation is when a writer uses information that is protected under copyright law without permission. This can be anything from music to literature. When material is protected by copyright, the user must have permission to use/perform the material. This is different from plagiarism because work that is strictly plagiarized is not usually protected by copyright law. When a writer plagiarizes, he/she is taking another person’s work and passing it off as their own. A person who is plagiarizing would not give credit to the original author of the work that they are using as their own.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Plagiarism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_violations

4)   What are some techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?

a.   There are several ways a writer can diligently avoid plagiarizing work. One way is citing their sources in two different ways. The first way a writer should cite is using in text citations. The second is by doing a full citation in the bibliography (works cited) page at the end of the report. It is easy to get lost in the writing and miss a citation. A tip on making sure sources are not missed is to cite as you write the document. Whenever an in text citation is made, write the full citation in the bibliography as well. This method insures that citations are not missed. Another tip is to cite everything that could possibly need to be given credit. If a writer is not sure on whether to cite or not, it is better to have too many than not enough citations to protect the work.

Reference

1. Subject Guides: Advanced Writing in the Disciplines (AWD) : Avoiding Plagiarism. (2019). Retrieved from https://subjectguides.lib.neu.edu/c.php?g=336193&p=2263384
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Plagiarism
3. Copyright violations. (2019). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_violations

I really like the tip here, to cite right away and both in text and the Works cited page. That's a fundamental many people forget. One question everyone had about my post was whether to avoid second person (you). Maybe revise the sentences in 4.a., to take you out, as in "A tip on making sure sources are not missed is to cite when writing." JVbird (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Original Talk Page

@JVbird: Hay Josef. I did a revision of your close paraphrasing/plagiarism paragraph based on my interpretation of editing suggestions on p. 63 & 64 of our class book, Carroll's Writing & Editing for Digital Media. Mainly, I revised it for brevity, present tense, article omissions, replacement of will with to, and removal of words that did not NEED to be there, not to be there which I have read somewhere, but currently cannot find on an electronic page or in print. Also, I changed the bolded close to a capital C for aesthetics so that that bulleted paragraph looked like the prior three.(Dmcgonagill (talk) 22:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC))

@Grlucas: Hi Dr. Lucas, did I do the signature right on an edit like I did to the paragraph of this discussion document we are all adding to?(Dmcgonagill (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2019 (UTC))

@Dmcgonagill: (I assume you asked me this question?) Yes, you're doing well. —Grlucas (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Grlucas: I forgot my signature. Corrected. Thanks.(Dmcgonagill (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2019 (UTC))

@Dmcgonagill: Thanks, Dana. I also wonder if my last bulleted paragraph has too much information in it. I thought originally of breaking it into 3 separate sub-points, but I couldn't quite figure out how to do that.. JVbird JVbird (talk) 00:25, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@JVbird: Maybe not three. I think two would be enough, what it is and how to avoid it. The bullets might be a bit much, how does it look as subheads? Namir Riptide (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@JVbird: Didn't leave much for anyone else to expound upon or discuss. Though I do wonder: why the specific use of a car company was used? Was it needed? could it be left out? Could we maybe instead point to other sources, such as JDpower or Consumerreport? Namir Riptide (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Namir Riptide: Hi Namir, I thought we were all writing a discussion on sourcing and then working on editing each other's posts. I definitely have problems with writing too much, including more details than probably necessary, and not being concise enough, so trim away! I like your idea of pointing to Consumer Reports instead of writing in the negative.

I also wonder if using second person (you) like I did doesn't work in the paragraphs and instead whether it needs to be third person. JVbird (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC) JVbird

@JVbird: I understand it to be third person since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia meant to provide a starting point for learning about a topic free from bias of the contributor.(Dmcgonagill (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2019 (UTC))

@JVbird:Honesty, it said discuss, so I thought he meant here in the Talk. Though between the two posts, there really isn't anything I could find to add. editing and questioning seem to be my better skills, though it tends to be more from lack of experience. Namir Riptide (talk) 02:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dillbug: Is your third sentence on material necessary or is there a better way to word/expound upon it?Namir Riptide (talk) 14:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Namir Riptide: Great suggestion. I will take another look and revise accordingly.Dillbug (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dillbug: I just reread the guidelines for discussion posting and realize my posts word length is over the recommended 150 word max. I promise to do better in future posts. My only excuse is there is so much information to retain and remember. I am still very much a work in progress so please bear with me!Dillbug (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dillbug: Yeah, I didn't see the thing the discussion posting either. But, we are here to learn from mistakes as well as successes. Namir Riptide (talk) 02:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dillbug: @JVbird: I know my name has some issues when replying to so I fixed your replies so notifications go out. If it helps: there is no space between "to" and "|", nor after the "|". So "reply to|Namir Riptide" Namir Riptide (talk) 02:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Namir Riptide: Thanks, Namir. I'm still struggling with the markup language. It's just very unfamiliar to me! But I plan to create a cheatsheet to help me with it so I can just cut and paste and not worry about errors in character or spelling! JVbird (talk) 13:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC) talk