Gilbert, You are making wild accusations once again without understanding the meaning of plagiarism. Do you remember that in your last post you had thanked me for giving you its correct definition from Indiana University? Please read it again. You need to learn that definition by heart.
BTW, Wikipedia quotes and weblinks are extensively provided by Frederick, not me. He is not committing plagiarism by doing so because he is telling us that he is citing Wikipedia. And yes, there is no difference between print media and electronic media. You can acquire knowledge through both sources. Indeed, for the past 10 years or so all technical journals are available as electronic databases that can be accessed on the web. You don't have to go to the library to get the latest information in your field. Let me remind you that knowledge outside the classroom or lecture hall is acquired by reading articles and books, whether they are in print or in electronic format on the internet. It is also acquired nowadays by listening to audiobooks and podcasts of lectures. But you should know that it is not just enough to have the skill to retrieve books and articles from the library or from the internet. One has to read them, and more importantly, understand them. That is why I am encouraging you to read that definition of plagiarism again, and try to understand it. Cheers, Santosh P.S. BTW, I have not accused you of plagiarism. You need to go after Cecil, not me. --- Gilbert Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >......................................... > IMHO the reason why Santosh has a difficult time > accepting other perspectives (as pointed by > Frederick) is because, he has plagiarized and is > mesmerized by the article in the web link that he > has read. This without giving even an iota of > analysis to what he read. Yet before I get to that: > Does he (and others) take the web author's > "authorized permission" when retrieving their > information from the web and using it on the Goanet > bulletin board? Based on the definition posted by > Arnold, "An extract from Wikipedia", does not this > use fall under "Plagiarism is the unauthorized use > ...." After all he extensively uses the web links. > If one thinks this is a broad interpretation as > stated in Wikipedia, that is what Santosh is doing > with the application of plagiarism to the print > media. Does plagiarism differentiate between print > media and Internet media? >
