Changes

...that I find all of your edits on Talk:Main Page to be absolutely lovely and helpful. They are probably the most informed, level-headed and intelligent suggestions and viewpoints I've seen on here for a while. Many of the tenets you seem to promote in your posts have gotten me blocked here many times, however, but keep up the good work:) [[User:Harbinger|Harbinger]] 13:13, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

...that I find all of your edits on Talk:Main Page to be absolutely lovely and helpful. They are probably the most informed, level-headed and intelligent suggestions and viewpoints I've seen on here for a while. Many of the tenets you seem to promote in your posts have gotten me blocked here many times, however, but keep up the good work:) [[User:Harbinger|Harbinger]] 13:13, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

== Scabies article ==

== Scabies article & Plagiarism ==

I could be wrong, but wouldn't the CDC info. on health issues be considered public domain?  There's no copyright information on the website as far as I can see, so it should be fine to copy the information word-for-word as long as it is noted that is how the information was obtained and a link provided to the CDC page. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:31, 5 October 2008 (EDT)

I could be wrong, but wouldn't the CDC info. on health issues be considered public domain?  There's no copyright information on the website as far as I can see, so it should be fine to copy the information word-for-word as long as it is noted that is how the information was obtained and a link provided to the CDC page. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:31, 5 October 2008 (EDT)

:::::Hmmm.  Taking the info from another site and rephrasing it sentence-by-sentence doesn't really improve things.  It certainly wouldn't fly in a decent high school class.  If the article includes only information from one other site, I think it's better to just go ahead and quote it, making it clear that it is quoted (by using quotation marks, etc.) and properly citing the source.  Then it's clear that you are not trying to pass someone else's work off as your own. Ideally a minimum of information will be quoted, with the reader being encouraged to read the rest of the original information at the original source.  You might enjoy this lovely article about plagarism.<ref>[http://www.pahomeschoolers.com/newsletter/issue78b.htm]</ref> --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 01:02, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

:::::Hmmm.  Taking the info from another site and rephrasing it sentence-by-sentence doesn't really improve things.  It certainly wouldn't fly in a decent high school class.  If the article includes only information from one other site, I think it's better to just go ahead and quote it, making it clear that it is quoted (by using quotation marks, etc.) and properly citing the source.  Then it's clear that you are not trying to pass someone else's work off as your own. Ideally a minimum of information will be quoted, with the reader being encouraged to read the rest of the original information at the original source.  You might enjoy this lovely article about plagarism.<ref>[http://www.pahomeschoolers.com/newsletter/issue78b.htm]</ref> --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 01:02, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

::::::Do you think it'd be a good idea to create a template to flag articles suspected of (or known to be) plagiarism?  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 23:12, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

::::::Do you think it'd be a good idea to create a template to flag articles suspected of (or known to be) plagiarism?  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 23:12, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

== Mex ==

== Mex ==