Talk:Seneca Falls Convention
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), an attempt to better organise and unify articles relating to the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers). If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid-importance within Quakerism. |
An event mentioned in this article is a July 19 selected anniversary.
Does that meta-text really belong in the article?:
- This Digest places the events of the Seneca Falls Convention within the larger context of American reform movements of the 1840s, discusses the influence of the Declaration of Independence on the Convention, and provides teachers and students with a sampling of social studies curriculum resources such as primary source documents, books, articles, and lesson plans available through local libraries or the World Wide Web.
(clem 20:39, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC))
On 2 Nov 06 I found a couple of places where this article had clearly been vandalized, and I fixed those items. I think the damage was done a few weeks ago (didn't check the various drafts very carefully). It'll be interesting to see if this provokes someone to do some more damage. Tei Tetua 21:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Plagiarism
Most of this article seems to plagiarized from the ericdigests.org site. Is this acceptable for wikipedia? - Amorwikipedia 19:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- In this case, it appears okay. The text at ericdigests.org is apparently in the public domain, being previously published by the US government's Education Resources Information Center. The texts at ericdigests.org are text versions of PDF documents available at the official ERIC site (here's the one used for this article: [1]). As far as I can tell, the text is indeed in the public domain, even though we know who the author is. However, you didn't ask about copyright; you asked about plagiarism. Wikipedia:Public domain states "Proper attribution to the author or source of a work, even if it is in the public domain, is still required to avoid plagiarism." The source of the text, the ericdigests.org site, is linked to in the "External links" section, and has been for two-and-a-half years. Whether that's sufficient to constitute "attribution" or not might be questioned, but it's certainly close. =) A more explicit explanation that much of the text came from that source may be in order, however. Powers T 14:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
