↑ Return to Top
Until today no in depth investigation on plagiarism in TechNet Wiki has been done. So some empirical data might be interesting. Even though this is no long term study, it gives interesting insights and allows the deduction of some rules of thumb.
Between June 7th and July 5th 2013 I searched for plagiarisms in 7 “search sessions”. In this analysis I only counted those articles as plagiarisms, which have an overwhelming percentage of stolen content. I used this approach to avoid discussions about cases of doubt or minor mistakes of members who are not acquainted with citation standards.
I had a look at (a) most new articles of last month (b) selected googled articles with just one revision (c) some articles of members who appear in one of the Wiki leaderboards (d) some other articles of members who have already published a plagiarism. The analysis was restricted to articles written in English.
Let’s have a look at the observations and some first deductions (“rules of thumb”).
Explanation of the columns:
During the last month I found some interesting samples and refinements:
Example: The article “SharePoint 2013: What is SkyDrive Pro“ was already deleted at TechNet Wiki. However, it was a 1:1 copy including formatting taken from this smart blog post.
Example: Visual Studio 2012
Member NN 12 used this technique in at least 22 of 94 articles. (I did only a quick check with Google in this case. Because I didn’t check the overlap with other plagiarism articles I already detected, these cases were not added to my statistics.)
Example: Migrate RADIUS config...
Example: How To View the MAC Address...
Example: Windows trust migration...
My personal summary: Plagiarism is a problem which occurs in an order similar to spam. All detected cases are serious, because the complete or nearly complete article is plagiarized. In most cases a plagiarism is not a single mistake. It is even possible to identify plagiarism strategies.
These documents handle plagiarism:
(1)“Do not just copy/paste from TechNet/MSDN or other websites, or blogs, or other sources of material that you did not create. If you do this and then save this without any editing, rewriting and improvement by you, you are plagiarizing another's work. If you are working on material that started on a blog or another website, it is important to link to the original material at the top of the article.”
(2) “Copy/pasting and then saving under your name is plagiarism. We frown on that here. Violations of copyright will be deleted.”
Terms of Use and Wiki: Code of Conduct exclude all cases of plagiarism – copying whole article or parts or them. I.e. zero tolerance for plagiarism.
The article How to Contribute Content to TechNet Wiki is the backdoor for the current plagiarism problems: In contradiction to Terms of Use and Code of Conduct it allows copying/changing/enhancing of content without having any permission! This article breaks the rules and should be changed!
Even worse: This behavior is not compliant to the US Copyright Act: Anyone who reproduces copyrighted material can be prosecuted. Even altering (“enhancing”) the content doesn’t matter as long as the content is substantially similar to the original.
You may argue that a plagiarist may add valuable enhancements to a plagiarized article. Please note, that that there are always (!) alternatives to plagiarism that are nicer, more trustworthy and respectful towwards the original author.
Let’s have a look at some real life scenarios:
You found a fantastic article and want to share it with the TechNet Wiki Community. Don’t copy the article. Instead add a link to an existing Wiki article. Or even better: Add a commented link to an existing Wiki article and explain why it is worth to follow this link.
You want to give an overview of a broad topic. Instead of creating a mashup article which plagiarizes (subsets of) a lot of articles you should instead create a landing page or an article with a commented link list.
You think a non-TechNet Wiki article (a blog post, a MSDN Library article, …) contains a mistake that should be corrected. In case of a blog post you can post a comment. MSDN Library also supports comments and feedback. You can contact the author.
You think you can enhance an article. Write your own article and link to the original you want to enhance instead of copying it. In some case you may detect that your enhancements do no justify another article. In this case you may decide to post a comment instead or even to discard the idea of a new article. This reduces your own effort and that of your readers.
You write an article about a sophisticated topic and need an introduction which supplies the reader with the necessary background information to follow the rest of your article. Instead of copying original sources you should mention the prerequisites a reader of your article should know and link to background articles.
None of these techniques require copying other articles. By the way: This may remind you of the DRY principle – don’t repeat yourself.
What’s about citation? Citation is OK, but keep in mind: Citation is like a spice – it is not the whole meal.
(1) According to the Copyright Act anyone can be prosecuted who reproduces copyrighted material. Even altering (“enhancing”) the content doesn’t matter as long as the content is substantially similar to the original.
(2) Imagine we are only adding source references to plagiarisms: In case of an impeachment it could be argued that Microsoft can easily detect those plagiarisms and has neglected its duties.
Maybe it is a good idea to contact Microsoft’s legal department (if adding source references to plagiarisms is preferred instead of deletions). I don’t see an alternative to a zero tolerance policy for plagiarism.
If we don't delete plagiarism and add source references instead, we silently accept plagiarism. But even the lax ”How to Contribute” article states: “Copy/pasting and then saving under your name is plagiarism. We frown on that here.”
Taken to extremes, this means “Anything goes” and “Plagiarized articles have a right of continuance”.
If we follow this track, we are lost: What’s right, what’s wrong? Where is the threshold for plagiarism? I can’t tell in such a setting – can you?
To make a long story short:
My suggestions:
I think it is time to act. It is up to you and the Community Council. Accepting plagiarism is no long term alternative.
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 27. Comment: Removed bullet point without text in "See Also" section
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 26. Comment: Extended "See also" add link to post "The Council Strikes Back"
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 25. Comment: (1) Added tag plagiarism (because it's about this topic). (2) Added link to a Top Contributor Awards post
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 24. Comment: Fixed misspelling
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 21. Comment: Fixed links to user profiles - they are now internal links (instead of external links).
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 20. Comment: Extended "See Also" section: Add link to blog post pf Horizon_Net and the article "Types of Articles Not Appropriate for TechNet Wiki"
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 18. Comment: Added tag: has Back to Top link
Naomi N edited Revision 17. Comment: Added link of how to report
Naomi N edited Revision 15. Comment: Typo fix
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 14. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Original. Comment: Minor grammar corrections
Naomi N edited Revision 1. Comment: Minor edit
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 2. Comment: Layout fixes
Same author posted several articles in Sweden. I am wondering if they are original
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 3. Comment: Fixed misspellings
Naomi N edited Revision 4. Comment: Typo fix
MSD library or MSDN library?
Hello Naomi,
at least one of the Swedish articles you mention was a plagiarism (like 44 other English articles he published), In This case an English article was translated with Google.
Carsten Siemens edited Revision 5. Comment: Fixed misspelling