User talk:Grlucas/Discussion: Sourcing/Archive 2

A Word of Caution Regarding Blog Posts and Press Releases
The main problem with blog posts and press releases is that they are not considered authoritative. Authoritative sources are created by experts in a field that have recognizable and proven credentials. Blog posts are usually the opinion and viewpoint of a single person, and often times bloggers are sponsored by companies, an example would be makeup artists are sponsored by makeup brands. Press releases are from a company that is being represented, which will highlight the positives of the company. Much like a press release, a company's website will highlight the positives and benefits from the product or person in which it represents. This is a biased source of information.

The problem with blog posts and press releases is that you don't know if it is truly credible. Blog posts are mostly people getting together and throwing he said she said comments or opinions and you don't see many people cite where they are getting their information. Press releases are close to being the same but the thing is that press releases can be biased and may also not be credible either. Strasburg7312 (talk) 22:29, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Press releases are used to get information or a message across to viewers in a way where they are led to think or feel about that topic in a certain way. They might omit things while embellishing others which leaves the provided information to be un-neutral and often times biased. The same applies for company websites. We rely on them to be honest, but it is their company so they are likely to only feature positive messages or statistics rather than reveal those that they try to conceal from mass public view. These are the reasons why these sources should not be used as the main place you pull information from. When you do end up finding a credible source, it is important to fully understand the material and be able to interpret it in your own words so you can avoid plagiarizing or closely paraphrasing the original source. Atallent (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Since I started college I have changed the type of sources I use. Blog post are not a good source of information for college students who want to use them in their homework. I used to think press releases were a little more credible but as others have said, press releases can be biased, the best way to do research is by looking at scholarly articles, they even have options where you can pick the formatting style for your citation so that it is easier to avoid plagiarism. Ysabella Escalona (talk) 00:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Copyright vs Plagiarism
A copyright violation is where someone uses a product, text, or video that they have not been given permission to use.

Plagiarism is someone copying the work of another credit, without any credit to the original author.

Copyright infringement or violation is the taking or using of the copyright holders information, product, or idea that you do not have access or authorization to use.

Plagiarism is the copying of someone else's work word for word or using their information without giving credit to the original author or citing the source from where you have retrieved the information. Strasburg7312 (talk) 22:34, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Close Paraphrasing
To avoid close paraphrasing or plagiarism, make sure to properly cite the sources that are used, don't follow the same pattern of the original sentence, and find the same information from multiple sources.

Close Paraphrasing is very closely related to plagiarism and can become plagiarism. Make sure to cite your sources if you are using quotes or editing it every so slightly; otherwise make sure to write in your own words. Use the ideas as a basis to build your own information off of, not to copy word for word and take one word out. Strasburg7312 (talk) 22:37, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Close Paraphrasing can be a little tricky to avoid, and just takes time and thoughtful deliberation. If a source has a bias, that is one way to amend the information so that it is in the neutral point of view. The information from the source will still need to be cited, though not necessarily reworded, just trimming it down to the facts and rewriting it accordingly.Jknox72 (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

—LynzeeWhite (talk) 16:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with everything that was stated . You were pretty much spot on in every aspect as it relates to the discussion questions. However, if I had to add my two cents in regards to plagiarism it would be using someone else's ideas, it's not necessarily always a work of art.--AmaniSensei (talk) 19:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * TSchiroMGA (talk) 04:14, 4 June 2019 (UTC) I agree that our definition of plagiarism should be expanded to more general terms.

I agree the plagiarism section for the definition could be more detailed. I think you should always cite your sources and follow the formatting guidelines for your work.I also think you should read the topic that you may be writing on and paraphrase it by putting it in your own words. I think by following these simple words and guidelines you can avoid committing plagiarism. I also agree that bloggers do not have verifiable sources a lot of the information they receive is not factual information and is often bias. Also a lot of the information they use may be for their own benefit of their company.I also think this bias can be misleading to whomever is reading the blog.I think for it to be accurate they have to have the credentials and have a neutral tone, and facts to back their statements up. -Acm2625 (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2019 (UTC)Acm2625
 * In response to the Blog post and press release section, I actually think people like to ignore that these sources are biased, at least in the case of blogs, because they trust the person and have matching ideas/beliefs. That may seem fine in someone's personal life, but in order to have a neutral piece of writing, a source needs to be from experts who aren't involved with the subject. I think using a University source like did above is usually a pretty safe source to use when it comes to being neutral. Also, I think a way to avoid close paraphrasing is to take notes in your own words while reading the source, so you can already have a base of how to phrase the information differently without constantly looking back at the source and getting their way of saying it stuck in your head. Of course, always reference the source regardless!— Sabub (talk) 00:25, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. Bloggers usually write with the intention to persuade or express their views. This may sometimes sway from real facts. When you depend on information from a biased or involved source it is very likely that you will get opinionated or skewed information. Copyright infringement differs from plagiarism because copying someone's work and passing it off as your own is the violation of plagiarism. Copyright infringement involved using someone's work without there consent or permission. To avoid plagiarism make sure to cite the source and when possible re-word ideas and concepts in your own words and thoughts. Kehli.west (talk) 00:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with everything put above so far! We face an issue within our society where most tend to take sources that lack authority at face value solely because it fits within their views. However, as a society we've come to expect more of each person using the internet. When posting information to a forum of any kind (even social media), most expect you to present your argument with valid support and for good reason. The internet is now more influential than ever, and we must all take care to put effort into ensuring what we say benefits society more than harms it. However, people also conflate the idea that it means their ideas are not valid or acceptable when discussing points, which contributes to higher rates of direct plagiarism and rewording. It's important that we stress to current and future generations to both think critically for yourself but also utilize and acknowledge the information gathered by others. Of course, this isn't to say every tweet has to be so structured every time. However it's better to set that as a precedent to nurture a more intelligent society, as well as prepare everyone for times they need to be impartial such as writing for sites such as Wikipedia. 1-800-OWLZ (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)