Wikipedia Tops List of Plagiarized Sources - T.H.E. Journal Options

[Newsfeed]

<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />[b]Wikipedia Tops List of Plagiarized Sources[/b]
T.H.E. Journal
Where are students finding the materials they plagiarize in their papers? According to a new study, WIkipedia tops the list for both secondary and college students. But as a category, encyclopedia sites are among the least popular ...

and more »

View the article

[thekohser]

Comment:

David, have you never looked at Answers.com? I'd estimate that 80% of the content on their site is simply copied from Wikipedia. Example: http://www.answers.com/topic/monarch-butterfly So, your report here, if anything, underestimates the problem of plagiarism from Wikipedia.

[communicat]

Comment:

David, have you never looked at Answers.com? I'd estimate that 80% of the content on their site is simply copied from Wikipedia. Example: http://www.answers.com/topic/monarch-butterfly So, your report here, if anything, underestimates the problem of plagiarism from Wikipedia.

For once I actually agree with Kohs.

[Ottava]

I'm surprised the obvious wasn't put out: Wikipedia probably tops list of websites with plagiarism too. People who plagiarize Wiki have a large chance of plagiarizing plagiarism.

[thekohser]

For once I actually agree with Kohs.

Give me a kiss, then, and it'll all be better, okay?

[EricBarbour]

The Turnitin study is priceless. They've just handed us a baseball bat with nails all over it.

It's spreading, too. 1 2 3 4

Time to ask Turnitin for an interview.

Here's an idea for a study: take a bunch of random topics from answers.com and Yahoo Answers,
and see how many contain material cribbed from Wikipedia.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Fri 4th November 2011, 7:25pm

[thekohser]

Here's an idea for a study: take a bunch of random topics from answers.com and Yahoo Answers,
and see how many contain material cribbed from Wikipedia.

Checking a bunch of random Answers.com pages for Wikipedia content would be like checking a bunch of fathers for penises. Wouldn't this public deal between the WMF and Answers.com sort of make redundant the need for a study?


Also, it may be worth noting that Answers went private on April 14, 2011, when its stock was acquired by AFCV Holdings, LLC, a portfolio company of growth equity investor Summit Partners. AFCV probably couldn't be more secretive if it tried.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Fri 4th November 2011, 7:46pm

[powercorrupts]

Wikipedia content is like the kind of horrible venereal disease that effects the brain. Who hell knows how far it all spreads?

[Silver seren]

Funny enough, I submitted a biology report to Turnitin today, as required, and I had 0% plagiarism on it, which...never happens. It's usually around 5-10% plagiarism, because the site considers common strings of words to be plagiarism.

I'm not sure how I managed that one, actually.

[Detective]

Checking a bunch of random Answers.com pages for Wikipedia content would be like checking a bunch of fathers for penises.

Don't mention that in a Wikipedia context! Or are you proposing to check non-white fathers so the imbalance on Commons can be fixed?

[thekohser]

Funny enough, I submitted a biology report to Turnitin today, as required, and I had 0% plagiarism on it, which...never happens. It's usually around 5-10% plagiarism, because the site considers common strings of words to be plagiarism.

I'm not sure how I managed that one, actually.

They probably never had a paper about cell meiosis in furries before.

[Silver seren]

Funny enough, I submitted a biology report to Turnitin today, as required, and I had 0% plagiarism on it, which...never happens. It's usually around 5-10% plagiarism, because the site considers common strings of words to be plagiarism.

I'm not sure how I managed that one, actually.

They probably never had a paper about cell meiosis in furries before.

*roll* No, Kohser, the British already beat me to that one, remember? My report was on Lophotrochozoa character traits.

This post has been edited by Silver seren: Sat 5th November 2011, 5:58pm

[Larry Sanger]

Back in 2004, I think it was, I was teaching Introduction to Ethics. I strongly warned them against using Wikipedia as a source. I required digital copies of student essays. I used some service like TurnItIn (it might have been them, I forget) to determine whether the students' essays were copied.

So...I caught one student red-handed (1) copying from a website I started, (2) that I had warned them against using, (3) in an ethics class.

That's one reason I'm not too excited about teaching college anymore.

[Ottava]

Back in 2004, I think it was, I was teaching Introduction to Ethics. I strongly warned them against using Wikipedia as a source. I required digital copies of student essays. I used some service like TurnItIn (it might have been them, I forget) to determine whether the students' essays were copied.

So...I caught one student red-handed (1) copying from a website I started, (2) that I had warned them against using, (3) in an ethics class.

That's one reason I'm not too excited about teaching college anymore.

Well, here is the thing - was the site you started have the right information or the wrong information? It is always wonderful when a student plagiarizes from an incorrect source.