Talk:Lev Chernyi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Lev Chernyi has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
July 14, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment / Military (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Poetry (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Politics (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Russia / Language & literature / History (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the language and literature of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
 
WikiProject Soviet Union (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

rewrite needed[edit]

I removed all text in this page, because it seems to be completely copied from http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/libertarians.html. This article was created on 18 December 2004 using text that was on that site previously (according to wbe.archive.org). --Gia.cossa 15:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism problems[edit]

As of July 8, 2008, there are still a couple of sentences that need to be rewritten:

  1. "In 1907, he published a book entitled Associational Anarchism,[3] in which he advocated the "free association of independent individuals" is word-for-word from the source.
  2. "denouncing the Communist dictatorship as the worst tyranny in human history" is too similar to "denounced the Communist dictatorship as the worst tyranny in human history". GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I have refactored the first statement, although it really is atomic: the book was published in 1907, it was called A.A. and he advocated "quote" in it — there aren't very many ways you can combine that into a sentence. The second claim is citing, not plagiarising the source, although it was not appropriately attributed as such when you pointed it out. Identifying sentence fragments as plagiarism is really going off the deep end of copyright paranoia, especially considering the seven-line quotes included in other articles. Using material from other sources is well within the bounds of fair use, provided that it is cited appropriately and an excessive amount (i.e. successive paragraphs lifted unaltered from the material) is not used. Regards, Skomorokh 21:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider it copyright paranoia so much as passing off someone else's writing as one's own. If identical phrasing is going to be used, it should be included in quotation marks to indicate that the statement is not an original work by the author of this article. Perhaps I've spent too many years in university, but the sentence in question (without quotation marks to indicate that it is someone else's work) would certainly be sufficient to get a "0" on an assignment in any university. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, an encyclopedia, not an academic paper, which is original research. All we do is compile other people's work. I don't need to tell you that original interpretation by article authors is anathema. Our only concerns with using the text of others are a) whether it is reliable b) whether it is attributed and c) whether its use breaches fair use guidelines. Regards, Skomorokh 00:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I am aware of the disctinction. I respectfully disagree with your opinion. GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I echo GaryColemanFan's concerns here - when you're quoting a section of text "attribution" requires indicating that not only the facts/ideas, but also the text itself, come directly from the source. This means treating them as quotes. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Gentlemen. We are discussing sentence fragments that contain neither unique or idiosyncratic phrasing nor controversial statements. Quotation is not appropriate.
If you honestly believe it is even conceptually possible to plagiarize stylistically unremarkable uncontroversial sentence fragments, feel free to refactor the offending line. The cat sat on the mat The mat was sat on by the cat. Crisis averted, cancel the lawsuit. Skomorokh 01:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)