Talk:Frederick William Sanderson: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:38, 25 April 2007

The first paragraph is blatent plagiarism of an essay by Richard Dawkins.Dave59 17:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dawkins was quoting lock, stock and barrel from the Wells book. 81.146.19.155 18:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dawkins may have quoted some text but certainly not all of it. I've been unable to find a copy of the H.G. Wells book but the text is clearly written in the style of Dawkins. The directly quoted material is okay since the H.G. Wells book appears to be out of copyright, but there is still a large amount of text belonging to Dawkins that is protected by copyright.Thepreacher 11:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone else offer a decent rewrite of this section? The whole page (as Dave59 said) has ripped off A Devil's Chaplain... Jazzwick

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 ::Dawkins was quoting lock, stock and barrel from the Wells book. [[User:81.146.19.155|81.146.19.155]] 18:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
+::: Dawkins may have quoted some text but certainly not all of it. I've been unable to find a copy of the H.G. Wells book but the text is clearly written in the style of Dawkins. The directly quoted material is okay since the H.G. Wells book appears to be out of copyright, but there is still a large amount of text belonging to Dawkins that is protected by copyright.[[User:Thepreacher|Thepreacher]] 11:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 Can anyone else offer a decent rewrite of this section? The whole page (as Dave59 said) has ripped off [[A Devil's Chaplain]]...  [[User:Jazzwick|Jazzwick]]