Are you trying to justify yourself for copying someone else's words?

Is not about justifying or copying anything from anyone. It is about historical dates and using them. There are not too many words one can use in conjunction with historical events and dates. 

 

Historical events occur and someone makes mention of it. Does that mean that they own the right to it because they wrote about it.

 

Let's for example, take Christopher Columbus. Documentation of his voyages-if someone were to make mention of the dates of his voyages in some comtemporary written work. Who must they cite? Those events have been written about so many times over the last 500 years. I would think historical dates are not the possessions of any individuals. I would certainly cite God rather than any man. In His hands he got the whole world.  

 

Let me get some thoughts on this. 

 

quote:

“Laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. Other states soon followed. . . . Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas (Texas!) explained in 1893, the ‘mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder.’ ”

The issue is not dates and events here. It is about lifting passages from another person's writing. If you are lifting, which is permissible, you have to quote source. Even if you paraphrase but you copy the idea, you have to give credit. If you are writing about history, you could be generic and say "according to historians".

You are a bit confused man....Don't tell me that Zakaria is historian.

Bro, this has nothing to do with Zakaria. Yuh appear to be an expert on plagerism. All I am aking who owns the rights to historical events and the dates of their occurences.

 

Can u answer the question? Keep Zakaria out of it, I am asking a question and not on his defence.

TI,

 

I am missing something in all of this. Help me to understand. The historical dates are recorded in the respective States(Kentucky, Lousiana, Texas, etc, etc) for all to view, comprehend and cite whenever they wishes. Apart from the lifting by Zakaria, does the author have rights to the historical dates. So many other people may have cited those dates and events in other written works. Who should be cited?

It has nothing to do with the dates or historical facts. If you copy someone's paragraph almost verbatim, that constitutes the plagiarism if the intention is to publish it as your own writing. If he had reworded the data in his hand, and not copy and paste, it would generaly have been ok. Or he could just have mentioned the source, and that would be ok to copy and paste.

Be original and write in your own hand, even if it takes longer. Oh, and keep it simple.

The rules for citation are very rigid. You cannot take whole cloth the writing of others and pass it off as your own. Mr Zakaria did a silly thing He is a far better writer than the person he supposedly filched from  and was  widely respected for his reporting and grasp of facts.

===

 

It is not the first time that a famous person got into trouble for using a careless research assistant. You read too much into my statement. Fareed Zakaria has the most intelligent show on CNN. You are either seriously ignorant of just a racist. Indians dominate disproportionately in many disciplines. They are outstanding engineers, doctors, scientists, venture capitalists, academics, etc. It is not possible to fake CVs for long in the US. You have to submit official transcripts or else you don’t get the job. You also go through background checks for several sensitive professions.

There was a guy in England, a Persaud who was in psychology and on TV and he was accused of plagiarism. By the way he is from Guyanese stock.

Actually, for Zakaria the issue wasn't plagiarism. Everyone knew he was a cheat like many other aristocrats are.

 

The real issue was that the right wing didn't like the idea of a "Guns Control" article been written by mediocre writers in India and then published in an influential magazine. What do Indians know about why Americans fight for the right to bear weapons? Indians know about how to use their caste system to exploit their fellow country men and make money in the west, but have no clue about how Americans got their independence. So what Zakaria committed was gross insult against the American history, culture and sensitivities.

wallah! Just as I thought. He was only the face.

What kind of history you are talking about. Ancient history relies on archeological evidence as well as on the accounts by different sources. You don't write a history book based on bible tales, for instance. You also need to search for evidence coming from neutral witnesses. In the case of the bible you look for stories told by the Greek, The Egyptians, the Mesopotamian, Phoenicians, etc.

 

For example, it is believed that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in the bible is simply an acculturation into Judaism of the real story of the Roman cities of Pompey and Herculaneum or that Samson is the adaptation of the myth of Heracles. The columns that Heracles separated are what is today called the Strait of Gibraltar. There are plenty of similar examples throughout history every where in the world.

Lucas, you might be right.  Remember what happen to Ron Paul a few years ago.  One of his staff was writing his letters to editors and Ron Paul did not know what the man was writing about.

William Shakespeare and Issac Newton were also guys who presented (signed) others people's work as theirs. This is is a practice that hasn't been eradicated. Rather, signing other people's works as yours is an indication of high status. You see George Bush for instance had his own speech writer. Bush just read what others wrote for him, the same with Tony Bliar. You don't need to be smart, just have the money to pay others to make you look smart.