I recently reviewed a burst of dozens of tag wiki excerpts from a single user. The rate seemed a little suspicious so I sampled a few and noticed they're completely copied from the first few lines of the corresponding wikipedia pages (or similar sites), word by word.

Unfortunately, other then rejecting them as copied content there wasn't much I could do. Needless to say they were all promptly approved by others since they seemed legit, and I guess most approvers didn't have have a reason to suspect them (I guess if anyone would have seen the existing reject reason they would be more careful). I thought of leaving a comment to the user on one of his posts but it seemed like cluttering the site. I did flag an unrelated answer for a mod, but I couldn't provide all the links to help them, and i'm afraid by the time a mod reaches that flag, these plagiarizing edits will be hiding at the back of the list.

Some examples -

  1. The foundationkit wiki was copied from here
  2. The rsrc wiki was copied from here
  3. The dynpro wiki was copied from here

and so on..

By the way, I saw several other posts related to the topic, but most were dealing with plagiarizing posts, which are easier as you can just leave a comment or flag directly, didn't see anything related to tag wikis

Anyway, I think we could use some minor improvements to deal with such cases:

  • When rejecting a tag edit with the following reason - This edit plagiarizes content from an external source without proper attribution, Leave a place to put a link to the source - I wouldn't have marked it as copied content without searching for it first, so I already have the link in front of me, but nothing to do with it. I could leave a free-text comment, but I think it would have a lesser effect since it can't be automatically marked as plagiarism (for reasons of auto moderation, user tracking, and stats collection), and nobody is going to see it anyway since it isn't a flag.

  • When providing such a link for copied content, either immediately reject the edit, or lower the requirement for 3 rejects. While other rejects due to bad wording or lack of usefulness may indeed require a community consensus, copied content is a plain fact (and an easy to prove one), so there's no point in waiting for more reviews.

  • Alternatively, alert other reviewers that such reject causes existing, by flashing a "this edit is suspected as plagiarism", or "disputed", or whatever - just to make them check for reject reasons.



You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .