Talk:Ivo John Lederer

Close paraphrasing
I believe that some of the wording is close enough to the wording in the New York Times obituary to be considered close paraphrasing and therefore copyvio.

Moonridden Girl notes:


 * The Times says:

I note that in the lead we have:

and the New York Times has:

Article:

NYT:

Article:

NYT:

Article:

NYT:

Article:

NYT:

I may have missed some, and other parts of the article may have come from elsewhere. Dougweller (talk) 16:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That is certainly close, thanks. What's the drill at this point, then - see if someone's willing to undertake the task of loosening up the paraphrases?  JohnInDC (talk) 17:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sort of. But it's best to rewrite, not just move words around. See[ WP:PARAPHRASE. It may end up shorter, but if he's really notable someone will come along and enlarge it. I'd probably delete the stuff that's obviously paraphrase or copyvio (the stuff above), check to see if anything left seems to be copyvio or close paraphrase, and rewrite from scratch. But ask User:Moonriddengirl if there's a guide I don't know about. Dougweller (talk) 14:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that the outlines of the refugee story can be sufficiently distilled to avoid copyvio problems, and have done so. It's also more - valuable to the article than the rest, which is just sort of a list of accomplishments.  I will see if I can pare than sufficiently cleanly as well, or just remove it.  JohnInDC (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Some is really pretty straight copyvio, I'd remove it, look at the article, and then see what needs fixing. Good work so far! Dougweller (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)