User contributions for 2605:6000:EF8C:BC00:A92B:D84A:C5BA:C62E

28 January 2019

• 02:1902:19, 28 January 2019 diff hist +455 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents →Unregistered editor clearly not here

27 January 2019

• 18:3918:39, 27 January 2019 diff hist +965 Plagiarism →Reverse plagiarism: Updated the references to the use of the term to more reliable sources. Moved the Poynter source to be an example of it occurring instead of a definition source but so far have not found significant research on reverse plagiarism with examples. Removed the comment on whether "reverse plagiarism" is often treated as "plagiarism", some sources imply it is/should be, but added that it occurs in similar contexts as plagiarism.
• 18:2218:22, 27 January 2019 diff hist +391 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 18:1818:18, 27 January 2019 diff hist +274 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 18:1018:10, 27 January 2019 diff hist +1,393 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 14:2214:22, 27 January 2019 diff hist +3 Plagiarism →Reverse plagiarism: changed appropriation to misappropriation.
• 14:1814:18, 27 January 2019 diff hist −31 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 14:1514:15, 27 January 2019 diff hist 0 Plagiarism →Reverse plagiarism: Just moving the citation needed. I added the relevant section to the talk page regarding the term definition and the reliability of the source. I understand if someone decides to remove the Daniel Ladinsky reference, although there aren't many newsworthy events of reverse plagiarism so it's hard to come by published cases of reverse plagiarism.
• 14:1114:11, 27 January 2019 diff hist −31 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 14:0914:09, 27 January 2019 diff hist +270 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 14:0714:07, 27 January 2019 diff hist +595 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 13:5813:58, 27 January 2019 diff hist +37 Plagiarism →Reverse plagiarism
• 13:5713:57, 27 January 2019 diff hist +793 Plagiarism Undid revision 880447408 by Melcous (talk) It's not actually talking about plagiarizing ones own work. It's talking about someone else inserting their ideas and attributing it to him. I think you need to read the article again. He discusses "Self-Plagiarism" as that is what was being misattributed to him but as for the activity of him being misattributed he defines it as "mis-plagiarism? reverse plagiarism? not-tribution?". A suggestion. Tag: Undo
• 13:4913:49, 27 January 2019 diff hist +5 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 13:4813:48, 27 January 2019 diff hist +836 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 13:3813:38, 27 January 2019 diff hist +503 Plagiarism →In other contexts: The sources regarding Ladinsky are there to provide a newsworthy event of reverse plagiarism and a reference event on original work being misrepresented, not for the term itself. I think I'm done for now, so if this still doesn't meet quality standards, feel free to fix it and I'll leave it as it is for another editor to readdress as needed.
• 13:1013:10, 27 January 2019 diff hist +1,435 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents →Unregistered editor clearly not here
• 12:5612:56, 27 January 2019 diff hist +290 Plagiarism Undid revision 880412651 by Melcous (talk) There. I removed anything that may not be directly referencable. Is this ok now? Tag: Undo
• 12:5112:51, 27 January 2019 diff hist +1,228 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents →Unregistered editor clearly not here
• 03:4403:44, 27 January 2019 diff hist +803 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 03:3103:31, 27 January 2019 diff hist −72 Plagiarism →In other contexts: Removed the section on misquotations/misattributions.
• 03:2303:23, 27 January 2019 diff hist −3 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 03:2303:23, 27 January 2019 diff hist +196 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 03:2203:22, 27 January 2019 diff hist +784 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 03:1303:13, 27 January 2019 diff hist +947 Plagiarism →In other contexts: Found a reference to someone discussing the fact that the term is not quite defined yet, which is rather ironic to use as a reference source for the term (reverse plagiarism itself?) Also added that the individuals involved may not be the original creator or the target of the "plagiarism"/false attribution. Also, changed title to emphasize that it is a "nontraditional" form of plagiarism
• 02:4702:47, 27 January 2019 diff hist −196 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism
• 02:4002:40, 27 January 2019 diff hist +868 Plagiarism Undid revision 880350504 by ElKevbo (talk) I added discussion on the term to the talk page. It's a simple phrase construction, I see no reason to require an external source to apply an adjective to the title of the page. Seems to be within the bounds of the term "Reverse" and "plagiarism" combined. Talk page also explains that had the "reverse target" been the one self attributing it would be traditional plagiarism so seems to fit here. Tag: Undo
• 02:3302:33, 27 January 2019 diff hist +2,102 Talk:Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism

26 January 2019

• 20:4720:47, 26 January 2019 diff hist +41 Plagiarism New to wikipedia, so not sure if I can cite wikipedia in wikipedia - but to add context to the original definition - I took it from this very page, since it is a natural reversion of the definition of plagiarism itself. The difference simply being the name of attribution and who the original creator of the work is. Added discussion on the "Talk" page for all interested.
• 20:2820:28, 26 January 2019 diff hist −19 Daniel Ladinsky Linking to the "plagiarism" article - The term "reverse plagiarism" is currently under discussion on where to include the concept and idea and how to formally represent it in our shared vocabulary.
• 20:2420:24, 26 January 2019 diff hist +1,514 Talk:Plagiarism No edit summary
• 20:1720:17, 26 January 2019 diff hist +1,084 Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism: Updated with references,since this is a somewhat novel term it is obviously difficult to find sources (Urban dictionary?) but it seems apparent that the definition clearly matches the incident and references in question. Since the definition of "Reverse Plagiarism" matches the "reverse" of plagiarism so succinctly as well as the incident being clearly representative of such a case it seems that the two are mutually reinforcing enough to justify the addition in my opinion
• 19:5419:54, 26 January 2019 diff hist +794 Plagiarism Undid revision 880320472 by S0091 (talk) Perhaps this should be moved to the talk page? But I happen to be here so I will reply, if you follow through to the Daniel Ladinsky article there are copious sources, I can provide one here if needed but not sure if it is just replicating what can be found elsewhere. After this undo, I will add an additional reference links. Tag: Undo
• 19:4619:46, 26 January 2019 diff hist +394 Plagiarism →Reverse Plagiarism: Updating the definition to be more in line with the original definition of plagiarism and clarifying the difference between misattribution/misquotations which occur throughout the internet, usually due to ignorance
• 19:2919:29, 26 January 2019 diff hist +69 Daniel Ladinsky Included a reference to what appears to be an incident of "Reverse Plagiarism". I suppose Ladinsky deserves the dubious honor of being the first "Reverse Plagiarist" on wikipedia as I had to add the section. May Hafez have mercy. "It is all just a contest and I never lose" -Ladinsky's Hafiz
• 19:2219:22, 26 January 2019 diff hist +400 Plagiarism →In other contexts: Hello, was recently editing an article on Daniel Ladinsky and realized there was not an article for "reverse plagiarism" to reference. It seems that this would fall under here since it is a strange situation of plagiarism. Feel free to move to a separate article if needed, but seems fine here in my opinion.
• 19:0919:09, 26 January 2019 diff hist +155 Daniel Ladinsky Not mentioning the translation controversy in his career also seems disingenuous. I consider it relevant enough to be required as the first sentence considering the nature of the following content which could otherwise be very misleading.
• 18:2318:23, 26 January 2019 diff hist +796 Talk:Daniel Ladinsky →Fraudulent Activity
• 18:1818:18, 26 January 2019 diff hist −1 Daniel Ladinsky Fixing quotes/named reference syntax error. Moving career elements to career (Elif Shafak licensing). Reorganizing Translation misrepresentation for clarity.
• 18:1318:13, 26 January 2019 diff hist +217 Daniel Ladinsky Improving readability and clarity, summarizing the points relevant to the misrepresentation of translation and that Ladinsky does not speak Persian/Farsi. Separating the 2009 incident from the analysis.
• 18:0318:03, 26 January 2019 diff hist +90 Daniel Ladinsky Reference updating
• 18:0018:00, 26 January 2019 diff hist +87 Daniel Ladinsky Emphasizing that is not just critics of his work that are dismayed, but also those who study Persian and Eastern literature traditions. The idea that it is only critics is somewhat disingenuous.
• 17:5317:53, 26 January 2019 diff hist +35 Daniel Ladinsky Emphasizing the fact that his books are not "translations" in order to increase awareness of the issue in the general public and reduce the likelihood of anything like this happening again.

25 January 2019

• 15:0115:01, 25 January 2019 diff hist +920 Talk:Daniel Ladinsky →Fraudulent Activity: new section