Talk:Gordon S. Heddell

Issues with article

First of all, let me make clear that I've got no bones with either the subject of this article (who seems like a really admirable person) or the creator of this article (whom I've never encountered before). Having said this, however, I have some concerns about the article.

The first thing that caught my attention was the claim, He was also selected by the University of Illinois as its recipient of the 2009 alumni achievement award. This didn't strike me as likely to be accurate; as phrased, it seemed to imply that he was the only recipient of the award in 2009, which I just didn't feel was likely, which is why I placed the tag on it. And I'd like to thank the article's creator for providing me with a citation. Unfortunately, that citation brought me to Mr. Heddell's official DOD biography page. And reading that page, it quickly became apparent that not only was that page the source for most of the information in our article here, that our article as it appeared when I first came across it is basically a lift straight from that bio. In other words, it's plagiarism, and worse, it's plagiarism of a source that was probably written by the subject himself. This is simply unacceptable for Wikipedia.

To make matters worse, I double-checked the U of I Alumni Achievement Page, found here. I could find Mr. Heddell's name nowhere on this. I readily admit, that I may have overlooked it, but I didn't see it.

My thinking is that this article needs to be trimmed down to a very basic statement of the facts, such as what his title is, how long he's been there, and perhaps, where he went to school. Until such time as independent, reliable sources provide us with more info, that's all we really should see here. I will not take these steps right now; instead, I will seek out another party, hopefully an administrator, to look into this and decide if my concerns are warranted. HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• I understand the plagiarism concern, but the copyright concern really isn't applicable, is it? These all seem to be official U.S. Government sources, and the U.S. Government by law has no copyright over its content. I really doubt that the material was written by this guy. None of this stuff usually is; but I think some reworking of the text would be in order.IndtAithir (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• See my edits to the text and citation just made; these should meet your concerns about the Alumni Award.Jplozai (talk) 20:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• • @IndtAithir, I initially didn't realise that copyright doesn't apply to US Govt content (I'm an Aussie) but the plagiarism is still an issue. The article needs a rewrite if anything. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:PLAGIARISM is too strong a term. The material comes (copypaste perhaps) from the official bio, so re-writing and attribution can fix it. (Also, look at WP:RESUME for amusement and info.) As for RS (or SPS by Heddell), the USG website is reliable. The article does need WP:LAYOUT fixes. Our newbie should fix this as part of the edgeumakation process. --S. Rich (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ahem, S.Rich, I don't mean to put you in an embarrassing position, but that's spelled edjumakation. I should know; I were a teacher before. HuskyHuskie (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Understood, but I was pushing my effort to improve this article and new editor to the very edge. (So why didn't speel-czech pik upe the misteak?)--S. Rich (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Using someone else's words or ideas without acknowledging the author is always plagiarism, regardless of the copyright issues. I've added Template:Include-USGov to the references section, which is the correct procedure when incorporating material (either in part or in whole) from a public domain source such as the US government. There is a whole family of these templates at Category:Attribution templates for use with various specific agencies as well as other public domain sources. Material like this should never be used in the article without clearly acknowledging the source, not only because it is plagiarism but also because the reader needs to know exactly where the information came from. Note that even though the information is from a government agency, it is not a source independent of the subject, hence an even greater need for the reader to be aware of exactly what the source is. Voceditenore (talk) 05:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

UIS vs. U of I (UIUC)

Jplozai, thanks for this edit. I was just looking at the link you provided, and it is, indeed, very deceptive of UIS because, while every part of the text references UIS (as opposed to UIUC), they have chosen to use a logo which eliminates any reference to the Springfield campus. Frankly, it's par for the course for ol' Sangamon State. They've recently decided to rebrand themselves "University of Illinois Springfield" even though the University of Illinois system (of which they are the smallest cog, and to whom they answer), calls them "University of Illinois at Springfield". This website is just one more step in trying to blur the distinction between the two. (Can you imagine the University of Wisconsin–Whitewater trying to pass itself off as "The University of Wisconsin"? Frankly, I'm embarrassed for UIS that they feel they can (and need) to do this.) Anyway, now it all makes sense to me (that is, why I couldn't find him on the University of Illinois Alumni Award website). HuskyHuskie (talk) 02:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I have to eat a small portion of crow. The Alumni Association logo is shared by all three "campi". But when you go to their main website,[1] they very clearly delineate between "UIS Alumni", "UIC Alumni" and "Illinois Alumni" (note: not "UIUC Alumni"). HuskyHuskie (talk) 02:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)