Category talk:Plagiarism

What is this category supposed to include
The editors who created this category should re-think what it was intended to include and which categories it belongs under. As far as I can tell, none of the articles in the category today have anything to do with journalism, but this category is in Category:Journalism ethics and Category:Criticism of journalism. Some of the articles are about plagiarism in popular culture, so they don't belong in Category:Academic scandals and Category:Educational assessment and evaluation. That leaves Category:Deception, which is certainly appropriate.

Would it be more appropriate to have Category:Plagiarism as a super-category with subcategories about academic plagiarism, plagiarism in journalism, and plagiarism in popular culture? — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 21:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Controversial plagiarisms
I see a bunch of articles in Category:Plagiarism controversies that were not controversial - merely well publicized or notorious. The word "controversy" implies debate amongst people with differing opinions - so for a plagiarism incident to be "controversial", there would have to be a bunch of people saying that it's not plagiarism and a bunch saying that it is. Since plagiarism (once exposed) is typically hard to deny - it's only very rarely controversial. SteveBaker (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)