Talk:Plagiarism from Wikipedia

Wikipedia Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Stephen Harrison (January 19, 2024). "Yes, Copying From Wikipedia Is Plagiarism". Slate. Retrieved January 20, 2024. There is even a Wikipedia article, titled "Plagiarism from Wikipedia," that cites several notable instances ranging from primatologist Jane Goodall to U.S. Sen. Rand Paul.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Wikipedia namespace pages

This is a Wikipedia article. For Wikipedia namespace pages:

See Wikipedia:Plagiarism of Wikipedia, which complements this article.
For Wikipedia policies concerning plagiarism in an external publication, see WP:BACKWARDSCOPY.

Should plagiarism be attributed to organizations/publishers rather than authors?

For example, in the Oxford University Press example, the plagiarism was done by an individual named Graham Lloyd. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say Graham Lloyd plagiarized, rather than Oxford University Press plagiarized? (Also, should it be noted that Oxford University Press says that it didn’t qualify as plagiarism? [I.E. is a statement made by a spokesperson for Oxford University Press about a matter in which it is involved considered a reliable source that should be mentioned?]) Yaakovaryeh (talk) 18:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spectacular case

"The Periodic Table: Nature's Building Blocks An Introduction to the Naturally Occurring Elements, Their Origins and Their Uses" By J. Theo Kloprogge, Concepcion P. Ponce, Tom Loomis. isbn=9780128215388, 0128215380. Much if not most of this new (2020) glossy book is copied from Wikipedia. see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Plagiarism in Elsevier book.--Smokefoot (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]