Talk:Herb Sheldon

Untitled
Not being the author, I could--and did--remove the tag. On comparing the present state of the article with the tv.com source, I found that the article was indeed based on it, but did not use the same words, did not use the sentence structure or the paragraph structure. and was a very appropriate selection of the high points, as compared with the great mass of detail in the source. Only smilarity was that they were arranged chronologically, which is inevitable in a bio. (Probably the article was further improved from when the tag was added) Article still needs some more sources, but an intelligent start. DGG 02:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree. It needs a rewrite--you need to paraphrase everything, not just switch around some words here and there, and if you want to keep the article, you should be willing to do it. grendel|khan 05:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Did a little more. Of the 2 or 3 people a day that I spot who shouldn't have been prodded/speedied, I rewrite about one a day, often for an over-modest academic. I notice others incidentally, but though I can help a little, I can't myself rewrite all the stuff that needs it & I usually stay close to my main interests, and childrens TV is not one of them. I do not think the current state of the article follows the source closely enough for plagiarism--but I accept that we may not agree--if you still think its too close, nominate it for Afd.  It may or may not survive AfD, but I'll have given it a chance to be seen and fixed. DGG 06:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)