h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I was wondering if you'll always accept text from a site such as Wikipedia, for putting into an entry, if new or updated?

for edited guide entries we want the resercher's own words.

1) copyed text is a breach of copyright.

2) its not reserch if you are copy and pasting, its just copy and pasting. H2G2 is ment to be for orginal articles that are the author's own work

3) wikipeadia is at times woefully inaccurate.

If you write something on Wikipedia and can verify that it is your own work and not altered by anyone (difficult to do with Wikipedia) you may transfer the content to h2g2. However, h2g2 is run by the BBC and when you submit any of your work to the BBC you grant the corporation a license to distribute your material, though you remain in control of the copyright, as is explained in the site's <./>Terms</.> and Conditions, which you agreed to when you signed up.

The upshot is - Wikipedia sucks; please write entirely original material for h2g2!

Ok, this is what I'm doing: I get a print out of the information, then I think of rewriting the text entirely as I go along, to save me copying, and with different and/or new information I get off other sources other than that of the internet.

That's fine, as long as you're just using Wikipedia as another source. But please be sure to say everything in your own words!

"as you're just using Wikipedia as another source"
What's that saying? Something along the lines of 'If you use one person as a source it's plagiarism, but if you use lots of people it's research'

well, we are reserchers


and how on ****** can people do a historic entry for instance without asking people or using a time machine

(dammit and if TiT turns up at this point I'll it will not be a surprise )

Just to let you know, that I won't be around for a while, as the computer needs to be used by another person.

Traveller in Time reporting

<>

No, it's saying that if you copy and paste one person's words it's plagiarism, but if you synthesise them into your own words it's research.

Though I'd be against using Wikipedia as a source at all, but that's just me.

I'm trying to work out which wiki entry amused me more,

the Wickford entry that mostly consisted of "americans are fat"

or the danish comics entry that had a picture of hitler captioned "the face of Mohammed"

Its can be a source for info but its like Sky/Fox/Channel 5 news - you have to check it out somewhere else to work out if it is true

"<>

No, it's saying that if you copy and paste one person's words it's plagiarism"

*AHEM* Let me rephrase that.
How does that saying go? Something along the lines of...

Don't copy and paste from Wikipedia, or any other source, onto h2g2 even if you intend to rewrite it. Wikipedia allows other people to use its content, but I believe that is on the condition that they do so with exactly the same conditions on it, which h2g2 can't grant. From any other source it's likely to be copyright.

If you want to do it that way, then use an offline text editor to do it.

As for historical entries, they shouldn't just be rewrites of other sources, no matter how many sources we use.