The criterion are:

  • most of the work is from a source that is not made by the OP (the original thread)


  • the substance of the source (and the crux of the question) rely heavily on information from another source


  • You are citing a source.

Some or all of these may be incorrect, hence I am asking for clarification and to allow my post to be more on topic than it currently is.

Here is my post:

(to be edited in here shortly) how to deal with a loot hungry player

I am not sure if I correctly or incorrectly made this a wiki post (mine is one of the answers) Could a pop up box not appear to make clear what is suitable for a good wiki post and what is not suitable for a good wiki post?

I am not the only one: prior post about confusing role of community wiki pages

  • The criteria I have in mind are related to the main concept "What is a wiki post" - however, this concept is not discussed within that section – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 8:52
  • Do you have permission to copy information from that source without it being a copyright violation or otherwise banned under the licencing of that source? – Robert Longson Sep 28 '18 at 9:29
  • I'm not selling my information for money so I don't need permission. It's only if I monetize my "advice" correct? – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 9:39
  • 5
    Incorrect, you can violate copyright even if you don't make money. You can also be guilty of plagiarism if you don't make money. – Robert Longson Sep 28 '18 at 9:43
  • How does fair use work as far as this specific question is concerned (and my answer to the post)? How do I better follow the rules? – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 9:44
  • Still, fair use really only applies if I don't claim the info is theirs. Millions of people may watch this and use parts of it as they choose (in groups which they do not ask payment); otherwise, I would here the fbi on my door. I also don't see that this information is banned from being used in the public. – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 9:48
  • Are there any other guidelines that should be added? – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 9:57
  • Can this question not be added to the link at the bottom of my answer to allow people to find a a subtopic under the main topic? Or potentially under another thread? This one does not have substance as a thread of it's own. – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 10:03
  • I was just trying to make a suggestion that would avoid future iterations of this question. – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 10:12
  • I'm sure my layer would love to here my thoughts on d and d. That comment would still be more appropriate as an answer. A comment is supposed to ask clarification, not answer the question as far as SE rules go. – Jackal21 Sep 28 '18 at 10:28

None of these are correct

I think the initial goal of community wikis were to build definitive answers that pulled from the knowledge of many users. While normally speaking, a post belonged to the user, a community wiki was handed over to the commons to build better posts.

That said, community wikis are one of those things that didn't quite work as intended, and I'd suggest considering them deprecated.

You're also looking at the wrong bit of the rules ;)

You can reference and build upon the work of others, as long as you cite appropriately and paraphrase. See the bit on referencing on the site help centre

There is no need to paraphrase simply because information is not first hand.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .