Re: What do we do when an article clearly isn't?

First Prev Next

Re: Abusive...

Wes Aday6-Oct-12 6:06

Wes Aday

6-Oct-12 6:06

Yes... he changed his name but did not change his attitude.

Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012

Law firm promoters commit crime!

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov5-Oct-12 13:58

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov

5-Oct-12 13:58

On this Q&A page, both posts actually try to promote some "family law" business:
What can happen in a divorce hearing when a solicitor knows his client has lied on oath?[^]

The offenders (sock puppets?) are:
http://www.codeproject.com/Members/Deeanna-Herriage[^],
http://www.codeproject.com/Members/Donna-Savini[^].

Such "law" should itself be criminalized — at least, out of here!

Thank you,

—SA

Sergey A Kryukov

Another one

Richard MacCutchan4-Oct-12 21:56

Richard MacCutchan

4-Oct-12 21:56

This member[^] is spamming the forums with rather pointless messages.

One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.

An "edge case" ? Author posts identical CP article and web-site content the same day ?

BillWoodruff4-Oct-12 20:48

BillWoodruff

4-Oct-12 20:48

I'm not sure what to make of a bright enthusiastic major contributor to CP who posts identical content on a personal web-site, and on CP as an article, simultaneously:

On CP:
An introduction to Type Script[^]

On web-site:
http://www.amazedsaint.com/2012/10/microsoft-typescript-and-quick.html[^]

I certainly don't think it's "spam," and I don't think it's "abusive," and, sure, I feel the article benefits CP, but something about it doesn't quite feel right.

Should a CP article, like the one cited above, allow the inclusion of many links to outside CP resources on the author of the article's website, his twitter account, his web-site: I am not sure.

Your thoughts ?

best, Bill

~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [^] !

It's fine if there is a clear statement and references (Re: An "edge case" ? Author posts identical CP article and web-site content the same day?)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov5-Oct-12 14:13

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov

5-Oct-12 14:13

As this is the same author, and if he is the real author, without any plagiarism involved, there is nothing wrong about publishing of the same material in different magazines. The only sin would be the lack of the reference to author's own work (which would reveal that the later work in not original, which would be a right thing; actually, the decent author should clearly indicate that this is some kind of compilation work).

Some publishers require only the original work, which can create some problems. As far as I know, CodeProject is the site where non-original works are considered as fine. But of course, the reference to the original work, as well as the clear statement that some work is not original should be there. I would rather write to the author and convince him to modify one of two of these articles to add appropriate statements and references or cross-references. If the author is interested in getting more trust and authority, it would only help him.

So, Bill, could you do it by yourself, as the original reporter of this problem? If you want to reference to this post, it would be fine.

—SA

Sergey A Kryukov

What do we do when an article clearly isn't?

OriginalGriff4-Oct-12 3:39

OriginalGriff

4-Oct-12 3:39

This one http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=19135&aid=404094[^] has appeared on the list of updated-for-aproval, but that's not a article! It's only 4 lines of active "code", and all of them are just variant date time format strings.

Surely, this is at best a tip? Is there really no mechanism for saying "This should not have been approved"?

Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water