Automoderated users, edit
1,837
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 174:
Line 174: +
→copying from US Gov sites: reply
Hsmom, we own material on US government sites. We paid for it as taxpayers, and it is public domain. Word-for-word copying from them is perfectly acceptable. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:07, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
Hsmom, we own material on US government sites. We paid for it as taxpayers, and it is public domain. Word-for-word copying from them is perfectly acceptable. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:07, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
: [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], it is acceptable if it is properly indicated as a quotation and cited, right? Otherwise, aren't we being deceitful by presenting someone else's work as our own? And copying so much of a single site, word-for-word, page after page, even including the pictures, without indicating that it is quoted directly from another site, and without adding any of the Conservapedia editor's own words, seems dishonest to me. It may be legal, if the material is in the public domain, but it still seems unethical to me. I'm uncomfortable with encouraging students to do this kind of copying, when instead they could read several sites on a particular subject and then create their own nice little article about it. It takes a bit more time, of course, but not much, and they learn so much more from doing it. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 18:25, 26 October 2008 (EDT)