Wikipedia:Plagiarism
- Plagiarism may also be a copyright violation, which is a blockable offense.
This guideline is under construction, see Wikipedia:Copyright problems for the current guideline on plagiarism on Wikipedia.
 | The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Don't make the work of others look like your own; give credit where it's due. |
Plagiarism is the taking of someone else's work and passing it off as one's own, whether verbatim or with only minimal changes. The copyright status of the work is irrelevant; directly copying a public-domain work is still plagiarism unless the original work is noted. Some, but not all, common facts and data (eg. material commonly found in infoboxes, such as corporate data, species taxonomy, etc.) can be freely copied, though copying the method of presentation of such data is sometimes considered plagiarism. Material has been plagiarized from books and printed media, websites, and GFDL-licensed works (including the work of other Wikipedia editors).
Even when material is not covered by copyright, it is still important to state its origin, including its authors or creators. Failure to include the origin of a work is misleading and also makes it more difficult for readers and editors to refer to the material's source. It may also violate the terms of the GFDL. If correctly attributed when submitted to Wikipedia, the resulting text can be edited by subsequent editors, within the bounds of Wikipedia polices and guidelines. However, subsequent rewritings should not lose the sense of the original, or lose track of where a concept, idea, or phrase originated from, unless the text has been so substantially rewritten as to be a new piece of work.
A clear distinction should also be drawn between work submitted by Wikipedia editors as their own work (which can be "edited mercilessly"); work marked as a quotation or paraphrase of other people's actions or words (which can be edited as long as the original sense is not lost); and direct copying of large blocks of free content written by other people. Unless the goal is to use text of this last sort as part of the article, which can be mercilessly edited, it may be better to use smaller pieces as direct quotations.
Note that making a charge of plagiarism towards another editor is a serious statement, and may be regarded as uncivil if the situation is not blatant. Please use care to frame concerns in an appropriate way.
Plagiarism defined
Definitions of plagiarism differ. A very basic, plain-spoken definition is offered by Ann Lathrop and Kathleen Foss in their 2000 guide Student Cheating and Plagiarism in the Internet Era: A Wake-up Call: "If you didn't think of it and write it all on your own, and you didn't cite (or write down) the sources where you found the ideas or words, it's probably plagiarism."[1] It doesn't matter where you find the information; even if your source is free content, you should acknowledge it.
Some definitions of plagiarism require that it be committed with the intent to deceive, while others do not.[2] Wikipedia is more concerned with impact than intent; whether it is the result of deliberate deception or improper citation, duplicating the work of others without credit can bring both author and publisher into disrepute.
Attributing text borrowed from other sources
Public domain text
Material from public domain and free sources is welcome on Wikipedia, provided it is properly identified and attributed. The best practice is to copy free content verbatim and indicate in the edit summary the source of the material. Further changes such as modernizing language and correcting errors should be done in separate edits after the original insertion of text. This allows a clear comparison to be made between the original source text and the current version in the article.
If you base an article on a public domain source, you should place a note to that effect in the references section. You can use an attribution template or you can write your own note. For an example, see the references section in planetary nomenclature,[1] which uses a large amount of text from the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature.
If you want to quote a reasonably large amount of text, but such text is a small portion of the article (say, a paragraph or two) you should use a blockquote followed by a reference to the resource. For example:
OSTM/Jason 2's five primary instruments are improved versions of those flying on Jason 1. These technological advances will allow scientists to monitor conditions in ocean coastal regions—home to about half of Earth's population. Compared with Jason 1 measurements, OSTM/Jason 2 will have substantially increased accuracy and provide data to within 25 kilometers (15 miles) of coastlines, nearly 50 percent closer to shore than in the past. Such improvements will be welcome news for all those making their living on the sea, from sailors and fishermen to workers in offshore industries. NOAA will use the improved data to better predict hurricane intensity, which is directly affected by the amount of heat stored in the upper ocean.[3]
If the amount of text you want to use is small (i.e. less than a sentence) quotation marks and an inline citation will suffice. Example: Small craters on Mars (typically with diameters less than 60 km) are named after "[s]mall towns and villages of the world with populations of approximately 100,000 or less".[4]
Large portions of text used in the article can be changed through the normal process of wiki editing; the article history will show the evolution of the text. Material within blockquotes and normal quotation marks should not be altered, with the exception of adding wiki-links or minor formatting changes for stylistic consistency (for example, replacing " -- " with "—" when denoting an endash). If material inside a quotation is inaccurate or out-of-date, the entire quotation must be replaced with rewritten text.
Attribution consists of more than just the words used in the copied text. It also applies to the structure of the article and the way the topics are covered. For this reason, once public domain attribution notices are placed in an article they should not be removed without checking that none of the structure, phrasing, language, or specific ideas of the original source are used in the article.
Text available under a free license
Some authors explicitly release their work under a free license. If the license of the material is compatible with the GFDL license of Wikipedia content, then it can be added directly to articles on Wikipedia; acceptable licenses include the GFDL (with no invariant sections or cover texts) and content granted into the public domain (release-all-rights). Creative Commons content is not currently approved for this purpose.
However, "free" license does not mean free of copyright concerns. For example, Wikipedia's contributors retain copyright to material they contribute here, though GFDL allows reuse and modification with proper attribution. If you contribute material under a free license, you must be sure that you comply with whatever licensing requirements exist. In all cases, the moral rights of the original authors whose works are copied must be respected during the term of their rights, which means that it is imperative that their work is distinguishable from the prose of the Wikipedia article. Because articles normally evolve through incremental changes, it is important to retain an anchor to the originally copied text, so that subsequent changes can be traced.
Copying within Wikipedia
Wikipedia's content is licensed under GFDL. Contributors continue to own copyright to their contributions, but liberally license it for reuse and modification. GFDL does require attribution.
Language translations between various Wikimedia Foundation wikis are perfectly acceptable provided that the original source is clearly indicated, which satisfies the attribution requirement. This can be done via the edit summary and by putting a note on the article talk page with a link to the original source. See Wikipedia:Translation and Category:Interwiki translation templates.
When copying material within Wikipedia, from one article to another, attribution is also required. For guidelines on copying and moving material within Wikipedia itself, see WP:MERGE, WP:SPLIT and WP:SUMMARY.
Generating many articles from a free source
Occasionally, Wikipedia undertakes large projects in which many articles are generated from free sources. For instance, Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911 was used as a source to build many articles in 2002. These articles were marked with the {{1911}} template to make it clear that text had been taken from this source. Similar templates for other free content can be found at Category:Attribution templates. These templates are an accepted way to give credit to free content when that free content is used to build Wikipedia and there is no immediate need to change articles that use them.
However, before engaging in any similar large-scale project of your own, be sure to discuss your changes at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) and/or a relevant Wikiproject, as this type of mass contribution remains controversial.
Attributing media borrowed from other sources
For images and other media, you must specify correct source and licensing information, otherwise they run the risk of deletion. In particular, you should never use {{PD-self}}, {{GFDL-self}} or {{self}} if the image isn't yours. If the source requests a credit line, e.g. "NASA/JPL/MSSS", you should put one in the author field of {{information}}.
What is not plagiarism
The purpose of citation is to provide educated conclusions drawn on a subject which back up a statement. In some cases it is not necessary to provide citation, and the reuse of such material is not considered plagiarism. Some such cases include:
- Factual information found in infoboxes.
- Simple, non-creative lists of information.[5]
- Common knowledge.[6]
- Simple mathematical calculations which can easily be reproduced.
- Simple logical deductions. However, complex logical deductions may require a citation in some cases.
How to respond to plagiarism
Failure to properly attribute text may be intentional, but it is often inadvertent. Avoiding plagiarism requires mastery of citation and paraphrasing. Contributors need to know when and how to cite sources. When paraphrasing, they need to know how much they can and should retain without following too closely on source text. They also need to remember when and where they saw something first, both in active research, while note taking, and during composition, to avoid unconscious plagiarism.[7]
Making a charge of plagiarism towards another editor is a serious statement, and may be regarded as uncivil if the situation is not blatant. Please use care to frame concerns in an appropriate way. Given that attribution errors may be inadvertent, intentional plagiarism should not be presumed in the absence of strong evidence. Remember to start with the assumption of good faith.
If you find that an editor persists in plagiarising other work after being notified of this guideline, report him or her at the administrators' noticeboard so that an administrator can deal with the issue. Be sure to include diffs which show both the plagiarisation and that multiple warnings were given and ignored.
How to find plagiarism
Text plagiarism
There are a number of methods to detect plagiarism. Plagiarized text usually demonstrates a sudden change of style and tone from a writer's usual style; it is often more advanced in grammar and vocabulary. Plagiarized material may contain unexplained acronyms or technical jargon (that had been described in an earlier part of the plagiarized document). Because plagiarized material was written for other purposes, it is often slightly off topic or unencyclopedic in tone. An editor who plagiarizes multiple sources will appear to change writing style abruptly.
An easy way to test for plagiarism of online sources is to cut and paste passages into a search engine. Exact matches or near matches may be plagiarism. When running such tests, be aware that some other websites reuse content from Wikipedia. A list of identified websites which do so is maintained at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. If in doubt, double check search engine results with an experienced Wikipedian.
Another option is to utilize a plagiarism detector. Plagiarism detection systems, some of which are available online for free, exist primarily to help detect academic fraud. The names of some such programs and services for which Wikipedia has articles may be found at Category:Plagiarism detectors. Wikipedia does not endorse any of these or certify their accuracy.
It can also be useful to do a direct comparison between cited sources and text within the article, to see if text has been plagiarised, including too-close paraphrasing of the original.
An editor's reputation may also be beneficial in helping to evaluate plagiarism.
Media plagiarism
Investigating media plagiarism and copyright infringement may begin with a commonsense question: does it seem likely that the uploader is the original source? Sometimes the answer to this will be obvious. The person who scans an image from an 1825 textbook on herbs is unlikely to be the author, even if he has claimed {{PD-self}}. Sometimes doubts may be triggered by the professional quality of media or by the exclusivity. Few people will have opportunity to set up a professional photo shoot in a celebrity's back yard.
An investigation into media plagiarism may begin with an online search through a search engine like google or google image. Sometimes a little ingenuity may be required to disclose an original source. If your topic is large, try narrowing down your keywords. You might spend hours searching images of Britney Spears, but Britney Spears Tokyo could more quickly locate the source of the suspect image.
But even if you don't locate a previously published original, plagiarism or copyright infringement may exist. Other factors to consider include the reputation of the uploader and, with images, image metadata, such as EXIF and XMP. EXIF data is automatically saved by most modern digital cameras, and it includes such information about an image as exposure mode, focal length, lens, aperture, flash, metering mode, white balance, date created, date file modified, file size, resolution, color mode, and, sometimes, copyright (see File:Cannon.jpg for EXIF in action). XMP is utilized by Adobe in its image manipulation programs; it tracks the history of modification and, when possible, original ownership information (see File:Redding Album Cover.jpg for XMP in action).
Frequently a person who uploads and claims credit for another's image will fail to modify the image metadata, or they may leave a visible or invisible digital watermark in place. If the author information conveyed by the metadata or watermark contradicts the author information on the image description page, this is a sign the image requires investigation. A user's original photographs can also be expected to have similar metadata, since most people own a small number of cameras; varied metadata is suspicious. However, tests based on metadata are not conclusive, as it can be altered or removed with simple tools.
Repairing plagiarism
Sometimes material from a copyrighted work is copied into Wikipedia with minimal rewriting. This may still be a violation of copyright as a derivative work, and the same concerns about plagiarism would apply if the phrases, concepts and ideas in the copied material are not attributed to the original author. If the text follows closely enough on the original in structure, presentation, and phrasing to raise copyright concerns, handle it as a copyright violation. If it does not, address it as plagiarism.
Copyright violations
Direct copying of copyrighted works may be a copyright violation. Doing so without attribution is also plagiarism. Such additions can be dealt with either by attribution, turning it into a quote with a source, or by truncation or removal of the copied material. If you find an article where direct copying has occurred, do something. If the material is a copyright violation, remove it or tag the article with the {{copyvio}} template. If the material is not a copyright violation, because the material is public domain or under free license, then attribute it. If the material is brief, consider turning it into a properly attributed quotation according to our Wikipedia:Non-free content policy or rewriting it in your own original language. If you are uncertain if the material is a copyright violation, flag it with template such as {{copypaste}} so that others can deal with it.
If you believe that an image or media file is a copyright infringement, please follow one of the processes at the guide to image deletion. Note that if the image is indisputably non-free and it can comply with our non-free content policy, you may be bold and retag it as a non-free image with an appropriate tag. If you are uncertain of the copyright status of an image or other media file, you may seek feedback at media copyright questions.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism doesn't have to be immediately removed, unlike copyright violations. It does need to be properly attributed to its source. If you find an example of plagiarism, where an editor has copied text, media or figures into Wikipedia without proper attribution, contact the editor responsible, point them to this guideline page and ask them to provide the proper attribution. It may also be helpful to politely refer them to Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citing sources, and/or Help:Citations quick reference. Editors who have difficulties or questions about this guidance can be referred to the Help Desk or media copyright questions.
You can also change the copied material or provide the attribution or source on your own. Material that is plagiarised but which does not violate copyright does not need to be removed from Wikipedia if it can be properly sourced. Add appropriate source information to the article or file page wherever possible. With text, you might move unsourced material to an article's talk page until sources can be found.
See also
Resources
- Plagiarism: What It is and How to Recognize and Avoid It Indiana University Writing Tutorial Services.
- University of New South Wales resource on plagiarism
- List of plagiarism resources at FamousPlagiarists.com
- Copyscape (website for detecting Internet plagiarism)
Notes
- ^ Lathrop, Ann; Foss, Kathleen (2000). Student Cheating and Plagiarism in the Internet Era: A Wake-up Call. Libraries Unlimited. p. 116. ISBN 156308841X. Retrieved 2009-01-13.
- ^ See "Anny Newman, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Diana Burgin, et al., Defendants, Appellees". U.S. Court of Appeals Cases & Opinions. justia.com. 22 April 1991. Retrieved 13 January 2009., Phillips, Jim (27 March 2008). "OU, former prof Mehta await verdict in defamation trial". The Athens News. Retrieved 13 January 2009.
- ^ "NASA Launches Ocean Satellite to Keep a Weather, Climate Eye Open" (Press release). Jet Propulsion Laboratory. 2008-06-20. Retrieved 2008-06-21.
- ^ "Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature (Appendix 6)". United States Geological Survey. Retrieved 2008-06-21.
- ^ If creativity has gone into the selection of elements (in terms of which facts are included and order of presentation), then it may be protected by copyright (see Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service). Non-creative lists, such as a list of song titles on an album or actors appearing in a film, are not copyrightable, and replication of these is not plagiarism.
- ^ Be aware, however, that using another person's words to discuss a topic that is common knowledge still qualifies as plagiarism. If an outside source uses a particular wording to state a fact that is common knowledge, that particular wording must be in quotes or reworded if it is included in a Wikipedia article; replicating another person's exact wording is plagiarism no matter what the content of that wording was.
- ^ See Perfect, Timothy J.; Stark, Louisa J. (2008). "Tales from the Crypt...omnesia". In John Dunlosky, Robert A. Bjork (ed.). Handbook of Metamemory and Memory. CRC Press. pp. 285–314. ISBN 0805862145.
{{cite book}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help); External link in|chapterurl=|chapterurl=ignored (|chapter-url=suggested) (help).