Talk:Lemont High School

Plagiarism
I just removed nearly the entire history section as it was copied word for word from >>http://www.lhs210.net/about/<< I strongly suspect that there is more plagiarism here, including some of the pictures. I will continue taking a chainsaw to this article to remove plagiarism. If you have been adding this information, please stop immediately, and do not re-add it. Re-adding overtly plagiarized material constitutes disruptive editing. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Plagiarism
I don't know who you think you are, but it took years to get this page to where it was before you butchered it. Sure, not everything was cited, as I actually have a life and don't know every small detail about Wikipedia. The information that was on here was free, public information that was factual and useful to all those interested. Thank you for doing a disservice to our school and community. --Ryanmcv (talk) 04:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The content that was added was copyrighted and thus cannot be used on Wikipedia. Please assume good faith. Netalarm   talk  04:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ryan,
 * I am sorry that you are looking at my editing as a disservice. The rules for this website are absolutely clear:  when you copy something word for word from another source, and don't give proper attribution, that is plagiarism.  Plagiarism is always an unacceptable practice in academia, whether you are writing an encyclopedia article or writing a scholarly paper.  To make matters worse, there were several pictures that were not only obvisouly lifted from the school's website, but their attribution was a blatant lie:  they were claimed to be owned by the editor, and were being released from copyright.  Again, it was plagiarism, and it was unacceptable.  For what it is worth:  how would a school community think if a member of its community plagiarized an article on the school?  To outsiders, it makes it look like the school condones such activity, or at the very least doesn't teach that this is wrong.  I am certain this is not the case.
 * I can believe that this was a mistake or lapse in judgement because I do assume good faith, however at this point there is no excuse for any level of ignorance on this issue. As a piece of friendly advice I would caution any editor editing on this article to be extremely careful about adding any text or images that could be construed as plagiarism.
 * On a tangential issue, while school websites are acceptable for referncing some material, it is not considered a reliable source for documenting everything. I will be reviewing this article soon and fact tagging anything that is not reliably sourced.
 * One more thing, Ryan ... to answer your first question ... who do I think I am? I am an editor here, nothing more or less.  All of us have an equal resposibility to safeguard articles against problems, whether they be vandalism, errors in factual information, or plagiarism.  We all have the power to revert and repair these situations; it requires no special license or permission.  I certainly may not know more about this school than you do, but I do know the consensus opinion of editors on what should nad should not be in an article ... I know what plagiarism is.  I hope that you will continue to improve this article, including adding reliable sources and proper references and citations to support claims, in addition to properly structuring the article based on the consensus of editors. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC)