This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject The Simpsons, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to The Simpsons 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.
I was bold and decided to remove the whole themes section. I noticed too many phrases that were taken verbatim from the Alberti book, without even being put into quotes. When you paraphrase, you need to do more than just change a word here or there. You need to put as much as possible in your own words. The section needs a complete rewrite. Zagalejo^^^ 05:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The whole section is paraphrased. It is not a copyvio. --Maitch (talk) 07:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I gave an example phrase in my edit summary. There are others. Just because you didn't borrow the entire sentence doesn't mean it's not a copyvio/plagiarism. As I said above, you should try to use as many of your own words as possible. (Either that, or put the Alberti stuff in quotes, and clearly introduce that material as Alberti's.) Zagalejo^^^ 07:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, you can't find one complete sentence, which is a copyvio and that is good enough for the section to stay. I will be willing to work more on it, if you put your criticism here instead of just deleting everything. --Maitch (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
You need to learn some things about plagiarism. I left a message on your talk page. I'll add some more examples, if you want, but it's time for me to go to sleep right now. I'll get back to you later. Zagalejo^^^ 07:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't have time right now but I can go over this in more detail later, but it would be best for us all to work with a specific example or two from the text on the talk page to assess this. Cirt (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Here are some phrases which are either exactly the same as or too close to the source material. I can't view all of the Alberti book through Google books - the images for the "Lovematic Grampa" section seem to have been corrupted - so it's possible that there are other problems.
"Wiggum is a notably bad police officer and the normally straight-laced Skinner" (exactly the same)
"underlines the ridiculousness of the premise" (original is "underlines the silliness of the premise")
"obligatory guest appearance by the spin-off host characters" (original is "obligatory guest appearance made by the spin-off's 'host' characters")
"This line is awkward and forced, especially when it is coming out of Lisa." (original is "The line is awkward and forced, particularly coming from the rather self-aware Lisa")
"they would rather have information which goes down easily and is not troubling or ethically difficult." (original is "They would rather have information that is sweet and goes down easy, not something that is troubling and ethically difficult."
"Candy is used metaphorically for the antidote to political awareness." (original is "it is the metaphorical antidote to any type of political awareness") Zagalejo^^^ 19:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)