Talk:Roger Touhy

Plagiarism
is someone copying non-Wikipedia text into this article? Either they need to get the source's permission (and cite their source), or they need to do something different - copying text without permission is a copyright violation. --Alvestrand 21:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Found the article that was being copied from, placed it in "external links", and reverted. --Alvestrand 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Much of the original text was plagiarized from Jay Robert Nash's World Encyclopedia of Organized Crime. This text has been removed. Major changes, additions, and referencing have now been emplaced, which should fix the copyright theft problem. - Tim1965 (talk) 05:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

STILL - 11 years later (2017) wholesale PLAGIARISM going on!!!

It's pathetic (1) how people have no understanding of what 'plagiarism' is, and (2) think it's ok.

I'm not a mafia aficionado, but, I just read this article, and went to Mafia Fandom Wikia (not because of any link from here-to-there), and I read the exact, same article (mafia.wikia.com/wiki/Roger_Touhy).

Verbatim. 100%

The irony - of me - 11years, almost to the exact day - I come across this. (talk) 10:25 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I think Mafia Fandom Wikia is copying Wikipedia. - Tim1965 (talk) 23:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

New edits
I think it's great that an expert on Roger Touhy (John W Tuohy) is willing to edit this article! I wanted to bring out a couple points about why those edits aren't currently in the article, though:
 * Wikipedia requires verifiable sources for any claim likely to be challenged. (This also helps avoid conflict of interest issues, which someone could claim is involved here -- since John W. Tuohy wrote the book on Roger Touhy, and book sales always help.) John W Tuohy makes many challengeable (e.g., factual) claims which don't meet that Wikipedia guideline.  Added citations is easy, and Wikipedia has a great page on how to do it.
 * John W Tuohy's edits also contradict the claims made by other editors in the article. Editors should not, except in glaringly obvious cases (for example: a book by a professor makes claim X and a book intended for children makes claim Y; clearly, claim X should be included and not claim Y), make judgment calls about which source is accurate. Rather, in such cases both claims should be included in the text and cites to both claims provided. The reader is thus invited to judge which claim to believe.
 * I also want to mention that Wikipedia's content should be encylopedic in tone. John W Tuohy's edits didn't really meet that standard. The article shouldn't argue with itself, nor should disagreements among editors be made in the article. If the above guideline on conflicting claims is followed, this guideline will be close to being met.

I strongly encourage John W Tuohy and everyone else to contribute to this article, and to Wikipedia! John W Tuohy, I think, clearly has access to published materials which others do not, and can make a terrific contribution to this article and the encyclopedia. - Tim1965 (talk) 14:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Roger Touhy
I am John W. Tuohy. I wrote a book, in fact, the book, on Roger Touhy however I have never added or subtracted to any wikipedia articles on Roger Touhy and I don't understand why the writing is saying that I have. The wikipedia article on Roger Touhy is very good and doesn't need my in put. - John tuohy (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Someone with the account User:John W Tuohy made these edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/John_W_Tuohy. I don't know who established that account, but that was the account name. - Tim1965 (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)