SkipCaptcha, nsSupply_SidersR, nsSupply_Siders_
8,436
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 169:
Line 169: +
Conservapedia talk:Contest4 (view source)
Revision as of 03:49, January 13, 2008
, 03:49, January 13, 2008re
I think we need to revise the copying-from-federal-government point. There is nothing wrong with copying from government sites. We're here to improve this resource, not reward creative writing. A quality entry can and should copy extensively from a .gov (federal government) site rather than rewrite the material in poor form. We commissioned .gov work and we own it and we should use it. Unless there is an objection, I'm going to clarify the "1 point" (penalty) provision.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:42, 12 January 2008 (EST)
I think we need to revise the copying-from-federal-government point. There is nothing wrong with copying from government sites. We're here to improve this resource, not reward creative writing. A quality entry can and should copy extensively from a .gov (federal government) site rather than rewrite the material in poor form. We commissioned .gov work and we own it and we should use it. Unless there is an objection, I'm going to clarify the "1 point" (penalty) provision.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:42, 12 January 2008 (EST)
:I do think that you should get less for copying, but not as significantly less as we're doing now - for what it's worth I say go ahead!--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 22:49, 12 January 2008 (EST)